ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2021
Evaluation of the Hologic Panther Fusion MRSA Assay for the detection of MRSA in ESwab specimens obtained from nose, throat, and perineum.
Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Enrichment culture (EC) remains gold standard for detecting MRSA colonisation, but molecular methods shorten turnaround time. The CE-marked automated Hologic Panther Fusion MRSA Assay (HPFM) is validated for nasal swabs. We compared HPFM with EC following an in-house PCR for detection of MRSA in nasal, pharyngeal, and perineal ESwabs. The same ESwabs were analysed using HPFM and inoculated in selective Tryptic Soy Broth (TSB) for overnight incubation. TSBs were screened by a PCR targeting nuc, femA, mecA, and mecC. Only samples with PCR results compatible with MRSA presence were inoculated onto 5% blood agar and chromogenic MRSA plates. HPFM detected MRSA in 103 of 132 EC positive samples indicating a sensitivity of 78.0% across sample types. When paired TSBs of 29 EC positive/HPFM negative samples were re-analysed by HPFM, MRSA was detected in 17/29 TSBs indicating that enrichment will increase the sensitivity of HPFM. HPFM analyses of cultured isolates from the remaining 12 EC positive/HPFM negative samples failed to detect orfX. HPFM reported the presence of MRSA in 22 samples where EC failed to identify MRSA. Fifteen of these ESwabs had been kept and direct culture without enrichment identified MRSA in seven samples. HPFM was useful for all sample sites. Compared to EC, the sensitivity of HPFM was limited because of lack of analytical sensitivity and failure to detect all MRSA variants. Failure of some MRSA-containing samples to enrich in cefoxitin-containing TSB indicates an unappreciated limitation of EC, which may lead to underestimation of the specificity of molecular assays.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33977413What 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.