ArticlePLoS biology2019
Rapid ultrasensitive detection platform for antimicrobial susceptibility testing.
Article in PLoS biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Detection of antimicrobial resistance via state-of-the-art technologies versus conventional methods.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Review
- Next-generation rapid phenotypic antimicrobial susceptibility testing.Nature communications · 2024Review
- Current and Future Technologies for the Detection of Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Ten golden rules for optimal antibiotic use in hospital settings: the WARNING call to action.World journal of emergency surgery : WJES · 2023Review
- Rapid automated antifungal susceptibility testing system for yeasts based on growth characteristics.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2023Article
- Single-cell pathogen diagnostics for combating antibiotic resistance.Nature reviews. Methods primers · 2023Article
- The Development of Technology to Prevent, Diagnose, and Manage Antimicrobial Resistance in Healthcare-Associated Infections.Vaccines · 2022Review
- Article
- Label-Free Optical Detection of Pathogenic Bacteria and Fungi at Extremely Low Cell Densities for Rapid Antibiotic Susceptibility Testing.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Article
- Rapid Methods for Antimicrobial Resistance Diagnostics.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Leapfrogging laboratories: the promise and pitfalls of high-tech solutions for antimicrobial resistance surveillance in low-income settings.BMJ global health · 2020Review
- Rapid isolation of rare targets from large fluid volumes.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Differential DNA accessibility to polymerase enables 30-minute phenotypic β-lactam antibiotic susceptibility testing of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae.PLoS biology · 2020Article
- Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing of Antimicrobial Peptides to Better Predict Efficacy.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2020Review
- Alginate Oligosaccharides Affect Mechanical Properties and Antifungal Activity of Alginate Buccal Films with Posaconazole.Marine drugs · 2019Article
- Antimicrobial Susceptibility Test for the Determination of Resistant and SusceptibleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Rapid detection and phenotyping of pathogenic microbes is critical for administration of effective antibiotic therapies and for impeding the spread of antibiotic resistance. Here, we present a novel platform, rapid ultrasensitive detector (RUSD), that utilizes the high reflectance coefficient at high incidence angles when light travels from low- to high-refractive-index media. RUSD leverages a principle that does not require complex manufacturing, labeling, or processing steps. Utilizing RUSD, we can detect extremely low cell densities (optical density [OD] ≥ 5 × 10-7) that correspond to approximately 20 bacterial cells or a single fungal cell in the detection volume, which is nearly 4 orders of magnitude more sensitive than standard OD methods. RUSD can measure minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of commonly used antibiotics against gram-negative and gram-positive bacteria, including Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Escherichia coli, within 2 to 4 h. Here, we demonstrate that antibiotic susceptibility tests for several pathogens can rapidly be performed with RUSD using both small inoculum sizes (500 cells/mL) and larger inoculum sizes (5 × 105 cells/mL) used in standard antibiotic susceptibility tests. We anticipate that the RUSD system will be particularly useful for the cases in which antibiotic susceptibility tests have to be done with a limited number of bacterial cells that are available. Its compatibility with standard antibiotic susceptibility tests, simplicity, and low cost can make RUSD a viable and rapidly deployed diagnostic tool.
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.