Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29433835›Full record

ArticleBiomedical journal2017

Towards automated detection, semi-quantification and identification of microbial growth in clinical bacteriology: A proof of concept.

Antony Croxatto, Raphaël Marcelpoil, Cédrick Orny, Didier Morel, Guy Prod'hom, Gilbert Greub

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biomedical journal, 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Digital imaging for reading of direct rapid antibiotic susceptibility tests from positive blood cultures.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2021
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Digitalization, clinical microbiology and infectious diseases.Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases · 2020
    Article
  13. Digital microbiology.Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases · 2020
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Laboratory Automation in Clinical Microbiology.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018
    Review
  16. Significant increase in cultivation of Gardnerella vaginalis, Alloscardovia omnicolens, Actinotignum schaalii, and Actinomyces spp. in urine samples with total laboratory automation.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2018
    Article
  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

6 authors.

Antony CroxattoInstitute of Microbiology, University Hospital of Lausanne, Institute of Microbiology, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Raphaël MarcelpoilBecton Dickinson Kiestra, Le Pont-de-Claix, France.
Cédrick OrnyBecton Dickinson Kiestra, Le Pont-de-Claix, France.
Didier MorelBecton Dickinson Corporate Clinical Development, Office of Science, Medicine and Technology, Le Pont-de-Claix, France.
Guy Prod'homInstitute of Microbiology, University Hospital of Lausanne, Institute of Microbiology, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Gilbert GreubInstitute of Microbiology, University Hospital of Lausanne, Institute of Microbiology, Lausanne, Switzerland. Electronic address: gilbert.greub@chuv.ch.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAutomation in microbiology laboratories impacts management, workflow, productivity and quality. Further improvements will be driven by the development of intelligent image analysis allowing automated detection of microbial growth, release of sterile samples, identification and quantification of bacterial colonies and reading of AST disk diffusion assays. We investigated the potential benefit of intelligent imaging analysis by developing algorithms allowing automated detection, semi-quantification and identification of bacterial colonies.

methodsDefined monomicrobial and clinical urine samples were inoculated by the BD Kiestra™ InoqulA™ BT module. Image acquisition of plates was performed with the BD Kiestra™ ImagA BT digital imaging module using the BD Kiestra™ Optis™ imaging software. The algorithms were developed and trained using defined data sets and their performance evaluated on both defined and clinical samples.

resultsThe detection algorithms exhibited 97.1% sensitivity and 93.6% specificity for microbial growth detection. Moreover, quantification accuracy of 80.2% and of 98.6% when accepting a 1 log tolerance was obtained with both defined monomicrobial and clinical urine samples, despite the presence of multiple species in the clinical samples. Automated identification accuracy of microbial colonies growing on chromogenic agar from defined isolates or clinical urine samples ranged from 98.3% to 99.7%, depending on the bacterial species tested.

conclusionThe development of intelligent algorithm represents a major innovation that has the potential to significantly increase laboratory quality and productivity while reducing turn-around-times. Further development and validation with larger numbers of defined and clinical samples should be performed before transferring intelligent imaging analysis into diagnostic laboratories.

Indexed as

Automation, LaboratoryAlgorithmsBacteriaBacteriologyBacteriuriaHumansPredictive Value of TestsAutomationBacteriologyDiagnosticExpertGrowthImaging

Identifiers

PMID29433835
PMCPMC6138813

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.