Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31014255›Full record

Observational studyBMC anesthesiology2019

Multiplex polymerase chain reaction to diagnose bloodstream infections in patients after cardiothoracic surgery.

Kevin Pilarczyk, Peter-Michael Rath, Joerg Steinmann, Matthias Thielmann, Stephan A Padosch, Max Dürbeck, Heinz Jakob, Fabian Dusse

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC anesthesiology, 2019. 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
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 37% 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Kevin PilarczykDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, imland Klinik Rendsburg managed by Sana GmbH, Rendsburg, Germany.
Peter-Michael RathInstitute of Medical Microbiology, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Joerg SteinmannInstitute of Medical Microbiology, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Matthias ThielmannDepartment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, West German Heart and Vascular Center Essen, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Stephan A PadoschDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital of Cologne, Kerpener Str. 62, 50937, Köln, Germany.
Max DürbeckDepartment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, West German Heart and Vascular Center Essen, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Heinz JakobDepartment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, West German Heart and Vascular Center Essen, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Fabian DusseDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital of Cologne, Kerpener Str. 62, 50937, Köln, Germany. fabian.dusse@uk-koeln.de.ORCID 0000-0001-7762-6966
Essen University Hospital · DEParacelsus Medizinische Privatuniversität · DEUniversity Hospital Cologne · DEUniversity of Duisburg-Essen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSepsis and other infectious complications are major causes of mortality and morbidity in patients after cardiac surgery. Whereas conventional blood culture (BC) suffers from low sensitivity as well as a reporting delay of approximately 48-72 h, real-time multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) based technologies like "SeptiFast" (SF) might offer a fast and reliable alternative for detection of bloodstream infections (BSI). The aim of this study was to compare the performance of SF with BC testing in patients suspected of having BSI after cardiac surgery.

methodsTwo hundred seventy-nine blood samples from 169 individuals with suspected BSI were analyzed by SF and BC. After excluding results attributable to contaminants, a comparison between the two groups were carried out. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated to determine the accuracy of clinical and laboratory values for the prediction of positive SF results.

results14.7% (n = 41) of blood samples were positive using SF and 17.2% (n = 49) using BC (n.s. [p > 0.05]). In six samples SF detected more than one pathogen. Among the 47 microorganisms identified by SF, only 11 (23.4%) could be confirmed by BC. SF identified a higher number of Gram-negative bacteria than BC did (28 vs. 12, χ

conclusionThe SF test represent a valuable method for rapid etiologic diagnosis of BSI in patients after cardiothoracic surgery. In particular this method applies for individuals with suspected Gram-negative blood stream. Due to the low performance in detecting Gram-positive pathogens and the inability to determine antibiotic susceptibility, it should be used in addition to BC only (Pilarczyk K, et al., Intensive Care Med Exp ,3(Suppl. 1):A884, 2015).

Indexed as

AgedBlood CultureCardiac Surgical ProceduresFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMultiplex Polymerase Chain ReactionPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesSepsisBlood cultureBlood stream infectionReal time multiplex polymerase chain reaction

Identifiers

PMID31014255
PMCPMC6480519
OpenAlexW2945107473

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.