Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29318458›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2018

Diagnostic performance of blood culture bottles for vitreous culture compared to conventional microbiological cultures in patients with suspected endophthalmitis.

Jan Kehrmann, Valerie Chapot, Jan Buer, Philipp Rating, Norbert Bornfeld, Joerg Steinmann

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Rapid diagnostic work-up ofAccess microbiology · 2023
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jan KehrmannInstitute of Medical Microbiology, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Hufelandstr. 55, 45122, Essen, Germany. jan.kehrmann@uk-essen.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1494-9191
Valerie ChapotInstitute of Medical Microbiology, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Hufelandstr. 55, 45122, Essen, Germany.
Jan BuerInstitute of Medical Microbiology, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Hufelandstr. 55, 45122, Essen, Germany.
Philipp RatingDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Norbert BornfeldDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Joerg SteinmannInstitute of Medical Microbiology, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Hufelandstr. 55, 45122, Essen, Germany. joerg.steinmann@uk-essen.de.
Essen University Hospital · DEUniversity of Duisburg-Essen · DENuremberg Hospital · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the performance of blood culture bottles in comparison to conventional microbiological culture techniques in detecting causative microorganisms of endophthalmitis and to determine their anti-infective susceptibility profiles. All consecutive cases with clinically suspected endophthalmitis in a university-based ophthalmology department between January 2009 and December 2016 were analysed in this retrospective comparative case series. Samples from 247 patients with suspected endophthalmitis underwent microbiological diagnostic work-up. All three culture methods were performed from 140 vitreous specimens. Vitreous fluid specimens were inoculated in blood culture bottles, aerobic and anaerobic broth solutions, and on solid media. Anti-infective susceptibility profiles were evaluated by semi-automated methods and/or gradient diffusion methods. Microorganisms were grown in 82 of 140 specimens for which all methods were performed (59%). Microorganisms were more frequently grown from blood culture bottles (55%) compared to broth solution (45%, p = 0.007) and solid media (33%, p < 0.0001). Considerable differences in the performance among culture media were detected for fungal pathogens. All grown fungi were detected by blood culture bottles (11 of 11, 100%). Broth solution recovered 64% and solid media 46% of grown fungi. No Gram-positive bacterium was resistant to vancomycin and all Gram-negative pathogens except for one isolate were susceptible to third-generation cephalosporins. In suspected endophthalmitis patients, blood culture bottles have a higher overall pathogen detection rate from vitreous fluid compared to conventional microbiological media, especially for fungi. The initial intravitreal antibiotic therapy with vancomycin plus third-generation cephalosporins appears to be an appropriate treatment approach for bacterial endophthalmitis.

Indexed as

Blood CultureMicrobiological TechniquesAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnti-Bacterial AgentsBacteriological TechniquesEndophthalmitisFemaleHumansMaleMicrobial Sensitivity TestsMiddle AgedAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID29318458
OpenAlexW2784116321

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.