ArticleBMC microbiology2019
Application of lab-on-a-chip multiplex cassette PCR for the detection of enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli.
Article in BMC microbiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of a Miniaturized Cassette PCR System with a Commercially Available Platform for DetectingMicromachines · 2021Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFast molecular detection methods benefit from ready-to-run lab-on-a-chip molecular assays with minimum preparation time. Detection efficiency of such methods can improve if multiple targets are detected simultaneously per given reaction. Detection of food pathogens, i.e. Escherichia coli (E. coli), is generally performed in two stages with the detection of multiple targets in each stage.With simultaneous testing, screening for pathogens is fast and efficient.
resultsIn this study, we show the application of multiplex PCR performed on a ready-made cassette to detect 10 targets each for eight samples known to harbor E. coli. In cassette PCR, the aluminum cassette (38.6 mm × 31.4 mm) contains 10 trenches having a total of 50 capillaries with microliter volumes of desiccated acrylamide gels holding all reagents required for the PCR including internal positive and negative controls. The gel contains LCGreen dye to detect double stranded DNA. Fluorescence monitoring allows the detection of the amplified products by melt curve analysis. In this application, each of the five capillaries in a given trench contains two of the primer sets for the detection of 10 targets in pathogenic E. coli, namely, O157, Eae, Stx1, Stx2 and six O-antigen genes. Primer specificity was confirmed. Each trench tests one sample. Eight minimally processed enriched beef carcass swab samples were analyzed for parallel detection of 10 targets within 1 h and 15 min. Samples were delivered to the capillaries by capillary forces thereby hydrating the gels. Multiplex cassette PCR results were confirmed with conventional multiplex PCRs performed in a commercial real-time PCR system.
conclusionsCassette PCR technology is ideally suited to multi-target detection of pathogens in food products. The cassette performs multiple PCR reactions in parallel, with multiplex detection of targets within each reaction unit. Cassette PCR/ melt curve analysis results for the simultaneous detection of 10 targets of pathogenic E.coli in beef carcass swab samples were confirmed with a conventional real-time PCR/ melt curve analysis as well as with agarose gel electrophoresis. Although designed for the detection of E. coli, this multiplex cassette PCR technique can be applied to any other assay where the fast detection of multiple targets is required.
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.