ArticleMicrobiologyOpen2021
Direct detection of ESKAPEc pathogens from whole blood using the T2Bacteria Panel allows early antimicrobial stewardship intervention in patients with sepsis.
Article in MicrobiologyOpen, 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 13 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.
Effect of Direct-from-blood Bacterial Testing on Antibiotic Administration and Clinical Outcomes: A Learning Healthcare Pragmatic Randomized Trial
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bacteremia evaluation with T2 magnetic resonance in the emergency room (BETTER).Microbiology spectrum · 2026Observational
- 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
- Sepsis Diagnosis in the Intensive Care Unit: A Comparative Study of Rapid Molecular Diagnostics and Conventional Blood Cultures.Biomedicines · 2026Article
- Determining the Usefulness of Selected Laboratory Markers of Inflammation in Qualifying Patients for T2 Biosystems Determination.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2025Article
- Article
- Evaluation of the Diagnostic Accuracy of the T2Resistance Panel (Research Use Only) in Patients With Possible Bacterial Bloodstream Infections.Ochsner journal · 2025Article
- Getting Up to Speed: Rapid Pathogen and Antimicrobial Resistance Diagnostics in Sepsis.Microorganisms · 2024Review
- Direct-from-Blood Detection of Pathogens: a Review of Technology and Challenges.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2023Review
- Differentiating methicillin resistant and susceptibleFrontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- Rapid and Simple Approaches for Diagnosis ofPolish journal of microbiology · 2022Review
- Combining T2Bacteria and T2Candida Panels for Diagnosing Intra-Abdominal Infections: A Prospective Multicenter Study.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
- Direct detection of ESKAPEc pathogens from whole blood using the T2Bacteria Panel allows early antimicrobial stewardship intervention in patients with sepsis.MicrobiologyOpen · 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
14 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the microbiological diagnosis of bloodstream infections (BSI), blood culture (BC) is considered the gold standard test despite its limitations such as low sensitivity and slow turnaround time. A new FDA-cleared and CE-marked platform utilizing magnetic resonance to detect amplified DNA of the six most common and/or problematic BSI pathogens (Enterococcus faecium, Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Escherichia coli; referred to as ESKAPEc) is available and may shorten the time to diagnosis and potentially improve antimicrobial utilization. Whole blood samples from hospitalized patients with clinical signs of sepsis were analyzed using the T2Bacteria Panel (T2Biosystems) and compared to simultaneously collected BC. Discrepant results were evaluated based on clinical infection criteria, combining supporting culture results and the opinion of treating physicians. A total of 55 samples from 53 patients were evaluated. The sensitivity and specificity of the T2Bacteria panel was 94% (16 out of 17 detections of T2Bacteria-targeted organisms) and 100%, respectively, with 36.4% (8 of 22) causes of BSI detected only by this method. The T2Bacteria Panel detected pathogens on average 55 hours faster than standard BC. In our study, 9 of 15 patients with positive T2Bacteria Panel results received early-targeted antibiotic therapy and/or modification of antimicrobial treatment based on T2Bacteria Panel findings. Given the high reliability, faster time to detection, and easy workflow, the technique qualifies as a point-of-care testing approach.
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.