ArticlePloS one2015
Evaluation of the Broad-Range PCR/ESI-MS Technology in Blood Specimens for the Molecular Diagnosis of Bloodstream Infections.
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 32 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
32 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical and Economic Value of Rapid Microbiological Diagnostics in Bloodstream Infections: A State-of-the-Art Evidence Review with Emphasis on PCR and MALDI-TOF.Microorganisms · 2026Review
- Letter to the editor regarding "microbiologic analysis of 140 patients undergoing revision total knee arthroplasty due to periprosthetic joint infection and aseptic loosening: droplet digital PCR analysis".Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- The immunosuppressive mechanisms induced by sepsis and the corresponding treatment strategies.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- Rapid molecular assays versus blood culture for bloodstream infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
- Clinical application of targeted next-generation sequencing in severe pneumonia: a retrospective review.Critical care (London, England) · 2024Article
- From Shadows to Spotlight: Enhancing Bacterial DNA Detection in Blood Samples through Cutting-Edge Molecular Pre-Amplification.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Exploring the Utility of Multiplex Infectious Disease Panel Testing for Diagnosis of Infection in Different Body Sites: A Joint Report of the Association for Molecular Pathology, American Society for Microbiology, Infectious Diseases Society of America, and Pan American Society for Clinical Virology.The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD · 2023Review
- Inflammatory mechanisms and intervention strategies for sepsis-induced myocardial dysfunction.Immunity, inflammation and disease · 2023Review
- Application of next-generation sequencing on diagnosis of bloodstream infection caused by Mycoplasma hominis in a patient with ANCA-associated vasculitis.Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials · 2023Article
- Clinical Diagnostic Performance of Droplet Digital PCR for Suspected Bloodstream Infections.Microbiology spectrum · 2023Article
- Diagnosis and Treatment of Invasive Candidiasis.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Validation of an Isothermal Amplification Platform for Microbial Identification and Antimicrobial Resistance Detection in Blood: A Prospective Study.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2021Article
- Rapid Detection of Methicillin-ResistantDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- PCR coupled to electrospray ionization mass spectrometry for microbiological diagnosis and surveillance of ventilator-associated pneumonia.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2020Article
- Performance of PCR/Electrospray Ionization-Mass Spectrometry on Whole Blood for Detection of Bloodstream Microorganisms in Patients with Suspected Sepsis.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2020Article
- Calculated parenteral initial treatment of bacterial infections: Economic aspects of antibiotic treatment.GMS infectious diseases · 2020Article
- 16S rDNA droplet digital PCR for monitoring bacterial DNAemia in bloodstream infections.PloS one · 2019Article
- Developmental roadmap for antimicrobial susceptibility testing systems.Nature reviews. Microbiology · 2019Review
- Substantial diagnostic impact of blood culture independent molecular methods in bloodstream infections: Superior performance of PCR/ESI-MS.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- How small modifications in laboratory workflow of blood cultures can have a significant impact on time to results.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRapid identification of the etiological agent in bloodstream infections is of vital importance for the early administration of the most appropriate antibiotic therapy. Molecular methods may offer an advantage to current culture-based microbiological diagnosis. The goal of this study was to evaluate the performance of IRIDICA, a platform based on universal genetic amplification followed by mass spectrometry (PCR/ESI-MS) for the molecular diagnosis of sepsis-related pathogens directly from the patient's blood.
methodsA total of 410 whole blood specimens from patients admitted to Emergency Room (ER) and Intensive Care Unit (ICU) with clinical suspicion of sepsis were tested with the IRIDICA BAC BSI Assay (broad identification of bacteria and Candida spp.). Microorganisms grown in culture and detected by IRIDICA were compared considering blood culture as gold standard. When discrepancies were found, clinical records and results from other cultures were taken into consideration (clinical infection criterion).
resultsThe overall positive and negative agreement of IRIDICA with blood culture in the analysis by specimen was 74.8% and 78.6%, respectively, rising to 76.9% and 87.2% respectively, when compared with the clinical infection criterion. Interestingly, IRIDICA detected 41 clinically significant microorganisms missed by culture, most of them from patients under antimicrobial treatment. Of special interest were the detections of one Mycoplasma hominis and two Mycobacterium simiae in immunocompromised patients. When ICU patients were analyzed separately, sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values compared with blood culture were 83.3%, 78.6%, 33.9% and 97.3% respectively, and 90.5%, 87.2%, 64.4% and 97.3% respectively, in comparison with the clinical infection criterion.
conclusionsIRIDICA is a promising technology that offers an early and reliable identification of a wide variety of pathogens directly from the patient's blood within 6h, which brings the opportunity to improve management of septic patients, especially for those critically ill admitted to the ICU.
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.