ArticleBMC infectious diseases2016
The effect of using blood culture bottle of bronchoalveolar larvage fluid in pneumonia.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPneumonia is a primary cause of morbidity and mortality in infectious disease, and increasing antimicrobial resistance has raised concerns of treatment failure. Therefore, we evaluated the value of a blood culture bottle for bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) samples on pathogen identification and on treatment modification in patients with pneumonia.
methodsWe conducted a prospective study and enrolled 39 patients who were hospitalized for pneumonia. Enrolled patients underwent BAL; a 10-ml aliquot was transferred to a sterile container for standard quantitative culture, and a 5 ml aliquot was transferred to both an aerobic and an anaerobic blood culture bottle.
resultsMicrobes were detected in all 39 (100 %) specimens and possible pathogens were identified in 34 patients (84.6 %) from BAL blood culture bottles. In contrast, microbes were detected in 10 patients (25.6 %) and possible pathogens were isolated in 8 patients (20.5 %) in BAL fluid using conventional culture methods. Finally, 8 of 39 (20.5 %) patients changed antibiotics according to the BAL blood culture results and pneumonia improved in 6 of these patients.
conclusionsUsing blood culture bottles for BAL sampling in patients with pneumonia is a sensitive method to detect pathogens in order to identify an adequate antibiotic treatment regimen.
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.