Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26732807›Full record

Trial reportIndian journal of pediatrics2016

Syndrome Evaluation System (SES) versus Blood Culture (BACTEC) in the Diagnosis and Management of Neonatal Sepsis--A Randomized Controlled Trial.

B Vishnu Bhat, P Prasad, Venkata Banda Ravi Kumar, B N Harish, K Krishnakumari, Anand Rekha, G Manjunath, B Adhisivam, B Shruthi

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Indian journal of pediatrics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Neonatal Sepsis-Newer Insights.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2022
    Review
  11. Blood Cultures and Molecular Diagnostics in Intensive Care Units to Diagnose Sepsis: A Bayesian Latent Class Model Analysis.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2021
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. 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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

B Vishnu BhatDepartment of Neonatology, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER), Puducherry, 605006, India. drvishnubhat@yahoo.com.
P PrasadDepartment of Neonatology, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER), Puducherry, 605006, India.
Venkata Banda Ravi KumarXCyton Diagnostics Pvt Ltd, Peenya, Bangalore, India.
B N HarishDepartment of Microbiology, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER), Puducherry, India.
K KrishnakumariXCyton Diagnostics Pvt Ltd, Peenya, Bangalore, India.
Anand RekhaXCyton Diagnostics Pvt Ltd, Peenya, Bangalore, India.
G ManjunathXCyton Diagnostics Pvt Ltd, Peenya, Bangalore, India.
B AdhisivamDepartment of Neonatology, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER), Puducherry, 605006, India.
B ShruthiDepartment of Neonatology, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER), Puducherry, 605006, India.
Jawaharlal Institute of Post Graduate Medical Education and Research · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the clinical outcome of a multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) based molecular diagnostic method -- Syndrome Evaluation System (SES) directed treatment strategy vs. standard of care (blood culture) directed treatment strategy for neonatal sepsis.

methodsThis randomized controlled trial (RCT) included 385 neonates with sepsis who were randomized into two groups -- SES and control (BACTEC). Both tests were performed for all the neonates. However, in the SES group, the results of SES test were revealed to the treating clinicians, while in the control group, SES results were withheld. Two ml of blood was drawn from each baby. One aliquot was sent for blood culture, whereas the remaining aliquot was sent for SES. Babies were then administered empirical IV antibiotics and given supportive care. Further antibiotic changes, if required were done in SES and control groups based on their respective reports. The microbiological profile, immediate outcome, duration of hospital stay, number of antibiotics used and readmission within a month in both groups were compared.

resultsSES was better than BACTEC in identifying the causative organism in both the groups (68 % vs. 18 % in SES group and 72 % vs. 18 % in control group). SES had 100 % concordance with blood culture by BACTEC. Detection of bacteria and fungi were four and ten-fold higher respectively with SES when compared to BACTEC culture. Microbiological diagnosis was rapid with SES compared to BACTEC (7 h vs. 72 h). Treatment based on SES resulted in significantly less mortality (3 % vs. 18 %). Readmission rate, duration of hospital stay and change in antibiotics were also significantly less in SES group.

conclusionsThis new molecular based diagnostic system (SES) helps in rapid and accurate diagnosis of neonatal sepsis and reduces mortality and morbidity in affected neonates.

Indexed as

Blood CultureMolecular TypingAnti-Bacterial AgentsFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornMaleMicrobial Sensitivity TestsNeonatal SepsisPoint-of-Care TestingSymptom AssessmentTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeAnti-Bacterial AgentsNeonatalPolymerase chain reactionSepsisSyndrome evaluation system (SES)

Identifiers

PMID26732807
OpenAlexW2223036665

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.