ArticleChinese medical journal2016
A Pilot Study of Quantitative Loop-mediated Isothermal Amplification-guided Target Therapies for Hospital-acquired Pneumonia.
Article in Chinese medical journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Accuracy of Molecular Amplification Assays for Diagnosis of Staphylococcal Pneumonia: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2021Pooled it
- Rapid, specific, and sensitive detection of the ureR_1 gene in Klebsiella pneumoniae by loop-mediated isothermal amplification method.Brazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologica · 2019Article
- Detection of contaminants in water supply: A review on state-of-the-art monitoring technologies and their applications.Sensors and actuators. B, Chemical · 2018Review
- Gram Stain and Molecular Method for the Diagnosis of Bacterial Pneumonia.Chinese medical journal · 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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIt is important to achieve the definitive pathogen identification in hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP), but the traditional culture results always delay the target antibiotic therapy. We assessed the method called quantitative loop-mediated isothermal amplification (qLAMP) as a new implement for steering of the antibiotic decision-making in HAP.
methodsTotally, 76 respiratory tract aspiration samples were prospectively collected from 60 HAP patients. DNA was isolated from these samples. Specific DNA fragments for identifying 11 pneumonia-related bacteria were amplified by qLAMP assay. Culture results of these patients were compared with the qLAMP results. Clinical data and treatment strategies were analyzed to evaluate the effects of qLAMP results on clinical data. McNemar test and Fisher's exact test were used for statistical analysis.
resultsThe detection of Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Klebsiella pneumonia, Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, Streptococcus pneumonia, and Acinetobacter baumannii by qLAMP was consistent with sputum culture (P > 0.05). The qLAMP results of 4 samples for Haemophilus influenzae, Legionella pneumophila, or Mycoplasma pneumonia (MP) were inconsistent with culture results; however, clinical data revealed that the qLAMP results were all reliable except 1 MP positive sample due to the lack of specific species identified in the final diagnosis. The improvement of clinical condition was more significant (P < 0.001) in patients with pathogen target-driven therapy based on qLAMP results than those with empirical therapy.
conclusionqLAMP is a more promising method for detection of pathogens in an early, rapid, sensitive, and specific manner than culture.
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.