Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25675242›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Rapid microbial sample preparation from blood using a novel concentration device.

Anna K Boardman, Jennifer Campbell, Holger Wirz, Andre Sharon, Alexis F Sauer-Budge

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Rapid Phenotypic Antibiotics Susceptibility Analysis by a 3D Printed Prototype.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Molecular Methodologies for Improved Polymicrobial Sepsis Diagnosis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  6. Molecular Diagnosis of Yeast Infections.Current fungal infection reports · 2021
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Anna K BoardmanCenter for Manufacturing Innovation, Fraunhofer USA, Brookline, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Jennifer CampbellCenter for Manufacturing Innovation, Fraunhofer USA, Brookline, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Holger WirzCenter for Manufacturing Innovation, Fraunhofer USA, Brookline, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Andre SharonCenter for Manufacturing Innovation, Fraunhofer USA, Brookline, Massachusetts, United States of America; Department of Mechanical Engineering, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Alexis F Sauer-BudgeCenter for Manufacturing Innovation, Fraunhofer USA, Brookline, Massachusetts, United States of America; Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.

Funding

Bacterial Drug Susceptibility Identification by Surface Enhanced Raman MicroscopyR01AI090815 · NIAID · FRAUNHOFER CENTER /MANUFACTURING INNOV · PI SAUER-BUDGE, ALEXIS F · 2010 to 2014
$4.0M
NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI090815NIAID NIH HHS R01AI090815
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Appropriate care for bacteremic patients is dictated by the amount of time needed for an accurate diagnosis. However, the concentration of microbes in the blood is extremely low in these patients (1-100 CFU/mL), traditionally requiring growth (blood culture) or amplification (e.g., PCR) for detection. Current culture-based methods can take a minimum of two days, while faster methods like PCR require a sample free of inhibitors (i.e., blood components). Though commercial kits exist for the removal of blood from these samples, they typically capture only DNA, thereby necessitating the use of blood culture for antimicrobial testing. Here, we report a novel, scaled-up sample preparation protocol carried out in a new microbial concentration device. The process can efficiently lyse 10 mL of bacteremic blood while maintaining the microorganisms' viability, giving a 30-μL final output volume. A suite of six microorganisms (Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus pneumoniae, Escherichia coli, Haemophilus influenzae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Candida albicans) at a range of clinically relevant concentrations was tested. All of the microorganisms had recoveries greater than 55% at the highest tested concentration of 100 CFU/mL, with three of them having over 70% recovery. At the lowest tested concentration of 3 CFU/mL, two microorganisms had recoveries of ca. 40-50% while the other four gave recoveries greater than 70%. Using a Taqman assay for methicillin-sensitive S. aureus (MSSA)to prove the feasibility of downstream analysis, we show that our microbial pellets are clean enough for PCR amplification. PCR testing of 56 spiked-positive and negative samples gave a specificity of 0.97 and a sensitivity of 0.96, showing that our sample preparation protocol holds great promise for the rapid diagnosis of bacteremia directly from a primary sample.

Indexed as

BacteremiaBacteriological TechniquesHumans

Identifiers

PMID25675242
PMCPMC4326418

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.