ArticleAnnals of laboratory medicine2014
Evaluation of PCR-reverse blot hybridization assay, REBA Sepsis-ID test, for simultaneous identification of bacterial pathogens and mecA and van genes from blood culture bottles.
Article in Annals of laboratory medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validation of Serum Calprotectin Relative to Other Biomarkers of Infection in Febrile Infants Presenting to the Emergency Department.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Prevalence and Characteristics of Onychomycosis in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis: A Single-centre Prospective Cross-sectional Study.Acta dermato-venereologica · 2021Article
- Development of a DNA microarray assay for rapid detection of fifteen bacterial pathogens in pneumonia.BMC microbiology · 2020Article
- Development of a Rapid Reverse Blot Hybridization Assay for Detection of Clinically Relevant Antibiotic Resistance Genes in Blood Cultures Testing Positive for Gram-Negative Bacteria.Frontiers in microbiology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate a newly developed PCR-based reverse blot hybridization assay (PCR-REBA), REBA Sepsis-ID (M&D, Wonju, Korea), to rapidly detect the presence of bacteremia and antimicrobial resistance gene in blood culture samples.
methodsOne thousand four hundred consecutive blood culture samples from patients with a delta neutrophil index greater than 2.7% were selected from March to July in 2013. Three hundred positive and 1,100 negative for bacterial growth in blood culture bottles samples were tested by conventional and real-time PCR-REBA, respectively.
resultsThe overall agreement between the conventional identification test and the REBA Sepsis-ID test was 95.3% (286/300). Agreement for gram-positive bacteria, gram-negative bacteria, fungi, and polymicrobials was 94.5% (190/201), 97.3% (71/73), 100% (14/14), and 91.7% (11/12), respectively. The detection rate of the mecA gene from methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus isolates was 97.8% (90/92). The vanA gene was detected in one blood culture sample from which vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus was isolated. When the cycle threshold for real-time PCR was defined as 30.0, 2.4% (26/1,100) of negative blood culture samples tested positive by real-time PCR.
conclusionsThe REBA Sepsis-ID test is capable of simultaneously and quickly detecting both causative agents and antimicrobial resistance genes, such as mecA and van, in blood culture positive samples.
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.