ArticleAnnals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials2016
Comparison of methods for the identification of microorganisms isolated from blood cultures.
Article in Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rapid colorimetric antimicrobial susceptibilities direct from positive blood culture for Gram-negative bacteria.Microbiology spectrum · 2025Article
- Coating silicon catheters with the optimized and stable carotenoid bioproduct from Micrococcus luteus inhibited the biofilm formation by multidrug-resistant Enterococcus faecalis via downregulation of GelE gene expression.Microbial cell factories · 2025Article
- Investigation of Bacterial Species and Their Antimicrobial Drug Resistance Profile in Feline Urinary Tract Infection in Thailand.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Evolving strategies in microbe identification-a comprehensive review of biochemical, MALDI-TOF MS and molecular testing methods.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2024Review
- Prevalence and antibiotics resistance status of Salmonella in raw meat consumed in various areas of Lahore, Pakistan.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Electronic nose versus VITEK 2 system for the rapid diagnosis of bloodstream infections.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2023Article
- Phenotypic and genotypic antibiotic susceptibility profiles of Gram-negative bacteria isolated from bloodstream infections at a referral hospital, Lusaka, Zambia.PLOS global public health · 2023Article
- Antibiogram of Urinary Tract Infections and Sepsis among Infants in Neonatal Intensive Care Unit.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Detection of multidrug-resistantVeterinary world · 2021Article
- Speciation and Antibiotic Susceptibilities of Coagulase Negative Staphylococci Isolated from Ocular Infections.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Species Identification in Plant-Associated Prokaryotes and Fungi Using DNA.Phytobiomes journal · 2020Article
- Investigating cross-contamination by yeast strains from dental solid waste to waste-handling workers by DNA sequencing.MicrobiologyOpen · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBloodstream infections are responsible for thousands of deaths each year. The rapid identification of the microorganisms causing these infections permits correct therapeutic management that will improve the prognosis of the patient. In an attempt to reduce the time spent on this step, microorganism identification devices have been developed, including the VITEK(®) 2 system, which is currently used in routine clinical microbiology laboratories.
methodsThis study evaluated the accuracy of the VITEK(®) 2 system in the identification of 400 microorganisms isolated from blood cultures and compared the results to those obtained with conventional phenotypic and genotypic methods. In parallel to the phenotypic identification methods, the DNA of these microorganisms was extracted directly from the blood culture bottles for genotypic identification by the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and DNA sequencing.
resultsThe automated VITEK(®) 2 system correctly identified 94.7 % (379/400) of the isolates. The YST and GN cards resulted in 100 % correct identifications of yeasts (15/15) and Gram-negative bacilli (165/165), respectively. The GP card correctly identified 92.6 % (199/215) of Gram-positive cocci, while the ANC card was unable to correctly identify any Gram-positive bacilli (0/5).
conclusionsThe performance of the VITEK(®) 2 system was considered acceptable and statistical analysis showed that the system is a suitable option for routine clinical microbiology laboratories to identify different microorganisms.
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.