ArticlePloS one2015
Performance Evaluation of the Verigene Gram-Positive and Gram-Negative Blood Culture Test for Direct Identification of Bacteria and Their Resistance Determinants from Positive Blood Cultures in Hong Kong.
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 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.
- Performance of the LIAISON PLEX gram-positive blood culture assay for identifying bacterial pathogens and resistance genes in blood cultures.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2026Article
- Antimicrobial resistance and virulence gene profiles of Enterococcus faecalis and Enterococcus faecium isolated from subclinical bovine mastitis milk and cow dung.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- From Throat to Limb: A Novel Case of Compartment Syndrome Following Group A Streptococcal Pharyngitis.Case reports in infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Getting Up to Speed: Rapid Pathogen and Antimicrobial Resistance Diagnostics in Sepsis.Microorganisms · 2024Review
- Effect of rapid cefpodoxime disk screening for early detection of third-generation cephalosporin resistance in Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae bacteremia.Journal of pharmaceutical health care and sciences · 2023Article
- Reporting of Antimicrobial Resistance from Blood Cultures, an Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group Survey Summary: Resistance Marker Reporting Practices from Positive Blood Cultures.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2023Article
- A Closer Look at the Laboratory Impact of Utilizing ePlex Blood Culture Identification Panels: a Workflow Analysis Using Rapid Molecular Detection for Positive Blood Cultures.Microbiology spectrum · 2022Article
- Multicenter Evaluation of the Acuitas AMR Gene Panel for Detection of an Extended Panel of Antimicrobial Resistance Genes among Bacterial Isolates.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2022Article
- Identification and Antibiotic Susceptibility Patterns of Clinical Blood Culture Isolates Not Identified by a Rapid Microarray Diagnostic System.Microbiology spectrum · 2021Observational
- A Multicenter Clinical Study To Demonstrate the Diagnostic Accuracy of the GenMark Dx ePlex Blood Culture Identification Gram-Negative Panel.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2021Article
- The Genotype-to-Phenotype Dilemma: How Should Laboratories Approach Discordant Susceptibility Results?Journal of clinical microbiology · 2021Review
- Rapid microbial identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing to drive better patient care: an evolving scenario.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2019Article
- New Microbiological Techniques in the Diagnosis of Bloodstream Infections.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2018Review
- Evaluation of the Accelerate Pheno™ system for rapid identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Gram-negative bacteria in bloodstream infections.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2018Article
- An Automated Sample Preparation Instrument to Accelerate Positive Blood Cultures Microbial Identification by MALDI-TOF Mass Spectrometry (VitekFrontiers in microbiology · 2018Article
- Parallel Evaluation of the MALDI Sepsityper and Verigene BC-GN Assays for Rapid Identification of Gram-Negative Bacilli from Positive Blood Cultures.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2017Article
- The new frontier of diagnostics: Molecular assays and their role in infection prevention and control.American journal of infection control · 2017Review
- Potential Impact of Rapid Blood Culture Testing for Gram-Positive Bacteremia in Japan with the Verigene Gram-Positive Blood Culture Test.The Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale · 2017Article
- Clinical Impact of Laboratory Implementation of Verigene BC-GN Microarray-Based Assay for Detection of Gram-Negative Bacteria in Positive Blood Cultures.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2016Article
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 at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA multicenter study was conducted to evaluate the diagnostic performance and the time to identifcation of the Verigene Blood Culture Test, the BC-GP and BC-GN assays, to identify both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria and their drug resistance determinants directly from positive blood cultures collected in Hong Kong. METHODS AND
resultsA total of 364 blood cultures were prospectively collected from four public hospitals, in which 114 and 250 cultures yielded Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria, and were tested with the BC-GP and BC-GN assay respectively. The overall identification agreement for Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria were 89.6% and 90.5% in monomicrobial cultures and 62.5% and 53.6% in polymicrobial cultures, respectively. The sensitivities for most genus/species achieved at least 80% except Enterococcus spp. (60%), K.oxytoca (0%), K.pneumoniae (69.2%), whereas the specificities for all targets ranged from 98.9% to 100%. Of note, 50% (7/14) cultures containing K.pneumoniae that were missed by the BC-GN assay were subsequently identified as K.variicola. Approximately 5.5% (20/364) cultures contained non-target organisms, of which Aeromonas spp. accounted for 25% and are of particular concern. For drug resistance determination, the Verigene test showed 100% sensitivity for identification of MRSA, VRE and carbapenem resistant Acinetobacter, and 84.4% for ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae based on the positive detection of mecA, vanA, blaOXA and blaCTXM respectively.
conclusionOverall, the Verigene test provided acceptable accuracy for identification of bacteria and resistance markers with a range of turnaround time 40.5 to 99.2 h faster than conventional methods in our region.
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.