Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34149321›Full record

ReviewCurrent infectious disease reports2021

New Microbiological Techniques for the Diagnosis of Bacterial Infections and Sepsis in ICU Including Point of Care.

Anna Maria Peri, Adam Stewart, Anna Hume, Adam Irwin, Patrick N A Harris

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current infectious disease reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06069206 (Effect of Direct-from-blood Bacterial Testing on Antibiotic Administration and Clinical Outcomes), which is not on this map. Cited by 44 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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.

NCT06069206 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Effect of Direct-from-blood Bacterial Testing on Antibiotic Administration and Clinical Outcomes: A Learning Healthcare Pragmatic Randomized Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorVanderbilt University Medical CenterRan2023 to 2025Enrolled500ConditionsBloodstream Infection, Sepsis Bacterial, MRSA Bacteremia, VancomycinArmsT2Bacteria® Panel (direct-from-blood testing), Usual Care
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

44 citing papers in PubMed, 69 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Real-TimeACS biomaterials science & engineering · 2025
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Anna Maria PeriUniversity of Queensland Centre for Clinical Research, Herston, Queensland 4029 Australia.
Adam StewartUniversity of Queensland Centre for Clinical Research, Herston, Queensland 4029 Australia.
Anna HumeRoyal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Queensland Health, Herston, Queensland Australia.
Adam IrwinUniversity of Queensland Centre for Clinical Research, Herston, Queensland 4029 Australia.
Patrick N A HarrisUniversity of Queensland Centre for Clinical Research, Herston, Queensland 4029 Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2895-0345
The University of Queensland · AUQueensland Health · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThe aim of this article is to review current and emerging microbiological techniques that support the rapid diagnosis of bacterial infections in critically ill patients, including their performance, strengths and pitfalls, as well as available data evaluating their clinical impact. RECENT

findingsBacterial infections and sepsis are responsible for significant morbidity and mortality in patients admitted to the intensive care unit and their management is further complicated by the increase in the global burden of antimicrobial resistance. In this setting, new diagnostic methods able to overcome the limits of traditional microbiology in terms of turn-around time and accuracy are highly warranted. We discuss the following broad themes: optimisation of existing culture-based methodologies, rapid antigen detection, nucleic acid detection (including multiplex PCR assays and microarrays), sepsis biomarkers, novel methods of pathogen detection (e.g. T2 magnetic resonance) and susceptibility testing (e.g. morphokinetic cellular analysis) and the application of direct metagenomics on clinical samples. The assessment of the host response through new "omics" technologies might also aid in early diagnosis of infections, as well as define non-infectious inflammatory states. SUMMARY: Despite being a promising field, there is still scarce evidence about the real-life impact of these assays on patient management. A common finding of available studies is that the performance of rapid diagnostic strategies highly depends on whether they are integrated within active antimicrobial stewardship programs. Assessing the impact of these emerging diagnostic methods through patient-centred clinical outcomes is a complex challenge for which large and well-designed studies are awaited.

Indexed as

Antimicrobial resistanceBloodstream infectionCritical careRapid diagnosticsSepsis

Identifiers

PMID34149321
PMCPMC8207499
OpenAlexW3168156504

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.