Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26872134›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

A Microfluidic Channel Method for Rapid Drug-Susceptibility Testing of Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Yoshimi Matsumoto, Shouichi Sakakihara, Andrey Grushnikov, Kazuma Kikuchi, Hiroyuki Noji, Akihito Yamaguchi, Ryota Iino, Yasushi Yagi, Kunihiko Nishino

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 69 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Biofilm · 2024
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Rapid Methods for Antimicrobial Resistance Diagnostics.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Identification and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing ofApplied and environmental microbiology · 2020
    Article
  16. Modern Tools for Rapid Diagnostics of Antimicrobial Resistance.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2020
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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 4 institutions in 1 country.

Yoshimi MatsumotoInstitute of Scientific and Industrial Research, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan.
Shouichi SakakiharaInstitute of Scientific and Industrial Research, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan.
Andrey GrushnikovInstitute of Scientific and Industrial Research, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan.
Kazuma KikuchiInstitute of Scientific and Industrial Research, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan.
Hiroyuki NojiDepartment of Applied Chemistry, Graduate School of Engineering, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Akihito YamaguchiInstitute of Scientific and Industrial Research, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan.
Ryota IinoOkazaki Institute for Integrative Bioscience and Institute for Molecular Science, National Institutes of Natural Sciences, Okazaki, Japan.
Yasushi YagiInstitute of Scientific and Industrial Research, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan.
Kunihiko NishinoInstitute of Scientific and Industrial Research, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan.
Osaka Research Institute of Industrial Science and Technology · JPOsaka University · JPOkazaki Institute for Integrative Bioscience · JPThe University of Tokyo · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The recent global increase in the prevalence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria and lack of development of new therapeutic agents emphasize the importance of selecting appropriate antimicrobials for the treatment of infections. However, to date, the development of completely accelerated drug susceptibility testing methods has not been achieved despite the availability of a rapid identification method. We proposed an innovative rapid method for drug susceptibility testing for Pseudomonas aeruginosa that provides results within 3 h. The drug susceptibility testing microfluidic (DSTM) device was prepared using soft lithography. It consisted of five sets of four microfluidic channels sharing one inlet slot, and the four channels are gathered in a small area, permitting simultaneous microscopic observation. Antimicrobials were pre-introduced into each channel and dried before use. Bacterial suspensions in cation-adjusted Mueller-Hinton broth were introduced from the inlet slot and incubated for 3 h. Susceptibilities were microscopically evaluated on the basis of differences in cell numbers and shapes between drug-treated and control cells, using dedicated software. The results of 101 clinically isolated strains of P. aeruginosa obtained using the DSTM method strongly correlated with results obtained using the ordinary microbroth dilution method. Ciprofloxacin, meropenem, ceftazidime, and piperacillin caused elongation in susceptible cells, while meropenem also induced spheroplast and bulge formation. Morphological observation could alternatively be used to determine the susceptibility of P. aeruginosa to these drugs, although amikacin had little effect on cell shape. The rapid determination of bacterial drug susceptibility using the DSTM method could also be applicable to other pathogenic species, and it could easily be introduced into clinical laboratories without the need for expensive instrumentation.

Indexed as

Lab-On-A-Chip DevicesAmikacinAnti-Bacterial AgentsCeftazidimeCiprofloxacinDrug Resistance, Multiple, BacterialEscherichia coliMeropenemMicrobial Sensitivity TestsPiperacillinPseudomonas aeruginosaThienamycinsAmikacinAnti-Bacterial AgentsCeftazidimeCiprofloxacinMeropenemPiperacillinThienamycins

Identifiers

PMID26872134
PMCPMC4752270
OpenAlexW2310138860

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.