Trial reportBMC infectious diseases2020
In-depth analysis of T2Bacteria positive results in patients with concurrent negative blood culture: a case series.
Trial report in BMC infectious diseases, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of Direct-from-blood Bacterial Testing on Antibiotics Administration in Adults Presenting With Acute Infection: A Randomized Trial.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2026Article
- Use of T2Bacteria Panel in Pediatric Hematopoietic Cell Transplant and Cellular Therapy Patients: A Single-Center Experience.Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society · 2025Article
- Plasma ddPCR for etiological diagnosis of focal bacterial infections.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- The role of rapid multiplex molecular syndromic panels in the clinical management of infections in critically ill patients: an experts-opinion document.Critical care (London, England) · 2024Review
- Performance of T2Bacteria in relationship to blood cultures - a retrospective comparative study.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2024Article
- Getting Up to Speed: Rapid Pathogen and Antimicrobial Resistance Diagnostics in Sepsis.Microorganisms · 2024Review
- Clinical evaluation of a multiplex droplet digital PCR for pathogen detection in critically ill COVID-19 patients with bloodstream infections.Infection · 2024Article
- Point-of-Care Method T2BacteriaMicroorganisms · 2024Article
- Clinical evaluation of a multiplex droplet digital PCR for diagnosing suspected bloodstream infections: a prospective study.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024Article
- Clinical evaluation of droplet digital PCR in the early identification of suspected sepsis patients in the emergency department: a prospective observational study.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024Observational
- Direct-from-Blood Detection of Pathogens: a Review of Technology and Challenges.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2023Review
- Combining T2Bacteria and T2Candida Panels for Diagnosing Intra-Abdominal Infections: A Prospective Multicenter Study.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Clinical validation of a multiplex droplet digital PCR for diagnosing suspected bloodstream infections in ICU practice: a promising diagnostic tool.Critical care (London, England) · 2022Article
- Accuracy and Impact on Patient Management of New Tools for Diagnosis of Sepsis: Experience with the T2 Magnetic Resonance Bacteria Panel.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundT2Bacteria assay uses T2 magnetic resonance (T2MR) technology for the rapid diagnosis of bacterial bloodstream infections (BSIs). This FDA cleared technology can detect 5 of the most prevalent pathogens causing bacteremia (Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Enterococcus faecium). Because the significance of discordant results between the T2Bacteria assay and blood culture (BC) remains a challenge, in this case series we reviewed the medical records of patients who had a positive T2Bacteria test and a concurrent negative BC.
methodsAmong 233 participants, we identified 20 patients with 21 (9%) discordant T2Bacteria-positive/BC-negative (T2+/BC-) results. We classified these results based on clinical cultures and clinical evidence.
resultsWhen we analyzed these 21 discordant results in-depth, 11 (52.5%) fulfilled criteria for probable BSI, 4 (19%) for possible BSI, and 6 (28.5%) were presumptive false positives. Among the probable/possible BSIs, discordant results were often associated with patients diagnosed with closed space and localized infections [pyelonephritis (n = 7), abscess (n = 4), pneumonia (n = 1), infected hematoma (n = 1), and osteomyelitis (n = 1)]. Also, within the preceding 2 days of the T2+/BC- blood sample, 80% (16/20) of the patients had received at least one dose of an antimicrobial agent which was active against the T2Bacteria-detected pathogen.
conclusionsIn the majority of discrepant results, the T2Bacteria assay detected a plausible pathogen that was supported by clinical and/or microbiologic data. Discrepancies appear to be associated with closed space and localized infections and the recent use of effective antibacterial agents. The clinical significance and potential implications of such discordant results should be further investigated.
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.