ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2014
Prevalence and detection of mixed-population enterococcal bacteremia.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Global trends and research profile of antibiotic heteroresistance: a bibliometric and visual analysis.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Pooled it
- Consideration of within-patient diversity highlights transmission pathways and antimicrobial resistance gene variability in vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2024Article
- Genome-Based Analysis of Enterococcus faecium Bacteremia Associated with Recurrent and Mixed-Strain Infection.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mixed-population (heterogeneous) enterococcal bacteremia (MEB) is rarely reported. Based on one occasion in which Vitek2 missed a vancomycin-resistant subpopulation isolated from a patient, we developed a simple method to detect this subpopulation and determined MEB frequency. The four patients presented here had either Enterococcus faecium or Enterococcus faecalis bacteremia caused by both vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) and vancomycin-susceptible enterococci (VSE). No prior common antibiotic therapy was observed, and bacteremia resolved with daptomycin, gentamicin, and/or linezolid treatment. In two cases, VRE presence was missed by Vitek2. To detect the VRE subpopulation, tryptic soy broth was inoculated from positive blood cultures and a saline suspension was inoculated to a vancomycin (6-μg/ml) (V6) plate. Two isolates from each patient were studied further. Relatedness was assessed by multilocus sequence typing, fitness was evaluated by growth curve and competition assays, and vanA presence was determined by PCR. MEB represented ∼5% of all enterococcal bacteremias. All VRE subpopulations grew on V6 plates but were missed in two instances by Vitek2. VRE and VSE isolates from each patient were closely related and did not differ in overall fitness. All four VRE isolates and 2/4 VSE isolates were vanA positive. MEBs occur regardless of prior antimicrobial therapy, are relatively common in our hospital, and are important to detect. As far as we know, this study is the first to report heterogeneous E. faecalis bacteremia. There is a simple method to detect VRE subpopulations that may be missed by Vitek2.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.