Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29264368›Full record

ReviewAnnals of translational medicine2017

The next generation of rapid point-of-care testing identification tools for ventilator-associated pneumonia.

Guillaume Millot, Benoit Voisin, Caroline Loiez, Frédéric Wallet, Saad Nseir

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of translational medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Guillaume MillotCHU Lille, Critical Care Center, Lille, France.
Benoit VoisinCHU Lille, Critical Care Center, Lille, France.
Caroline LoiezCHU Lille, Laboratory of Bacteriology, Lille, France.
Frédéric WalletCHU Lille, Laboratory of Bacteriology, Lille, France.
Saad NseirCHU Lille, Critical Care Center, Lille, France.
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Lille · FRLille Inflammation Research International Center · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a frequent issue in intensive care units (ICU), with a major impact on morbidity, mortality and cost of care. VAP diagnosis remains challenging: traditional culture-based microbiological techniques are still the gold-standard, but are too slow to enable clinicians to improve prognosis with timely antimicrobial therapy adjustment. Prolonged exposure to inappropriate antibiotics has also been shown to increase the incidence of multi-drug-resistant organisms (MDROs). Point-of-care testing (POCT) tools are diagnostic testing methods that can be used at or near the bedside, with delays ranging from a couple minutes to a few hours. The use of POCTs for VAP could allow for faster diagnosis and antimicrobial therapy adjustments. Despite uncertainty regarding their diagnostic value, C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT) can be detected using POCTs in few minutes. In VAP, CRP showed a sensitivity of 56% to 88% and specificity of 86% to 91%; PCT showed a sensitivity of 78% to 100% and a specificity between 75% and 97% using non-POCT methods. Automated microscopy could also be used in clinical ICU setting, with reported sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 97%, allowing for antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST) in less than 12 h. Multiplex polymerase chain reaction (MPCR) could allow for identification and AST approximation through the detection of drug-resistance genes in about 6 h, with reported sensitivity of 89.2% and specificity of 97.1%; although use as POCT was shown to result in test failure in about 40% of samples. Despite being at an early development stage, exhalome analysis, which allows for non-invasive fast identification, and chromogenic tests, more suited for the detection of drug-resistance enzymes, are also promising techniques for POCT diagnosis of VAP.

Indexed as

hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP)intensive care unit (ICU)Point-of-careventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP)

Identifiers

PMID29264368
PMCPMC5721214
OpenAlexW2769891280

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.