Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34315422›Full record

ArticleBMC infectious diseases2021

Evaluating the performance characteristics of different antimicrobial susceptibility testing methodologies for testing susceptibility of gram-negative bacteria to tigecycline.

Sima Babaei, Mehri Haeili

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Characterization of Carbapenem-ResistantAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  8. Large-Scale Analysis of Fitness Cost ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022
    Article
  9. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sima BabaeiDepartment of Animal Biology, Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran.
Mehri HaeiliDepartment of Animal Biology, Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran. m.haeili@tabrizu.ac.ir.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7390-0742
University of Tabriz · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe current emergence of multi-drug resistance among nosocomial pathogens has led to increased use of last-resort agents including Tigecycline (TGC). Availability of reliable methods for testing TGC susceptibility is crucial to accurately predict clinical outcomes. We evaluated the influence of different methodologies and type of media on TGC susceptibility of different gram-negative bacteria of clinical origin.

methodsThe TGC susceptibility of 84 clinical isolates of Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 29), Escherichia coli (n = 30), and Acinetobacter baumannii (n = 25) was tested by broth microdilution (BMD), Etest, agar dilution (AD) and disk diffusion (DD) methods using Mueller Hinton agar from Difco and Mueller Hinton broth (MHB) from two different manufacturers (Difco and Condalab). FDA TGC susceptibility breakpoints issued for Enterobacteriaceae were used for interpretation of the results.

resultsMICs determined by BMD using MHB from two suppliers showed a good correlation with overall essential agreement (EA) and categorical agreement (CA) being 100% and 95% respectively. However, a twofold rise in BMD-Condalab MICs which was detected in 50% of the isolates, resulted in changes in susceptibility categories of few isolates with MICs close to susceptibility breakpoints leading to an overall minor error (MI) rate of 4.7%. Among the tested methods, Etest showed the best correlation with BMD, being characterized with the lowest error rates (only 1% MI) and highest overall EA (100%) and CA (98.8%) for all subsets of isolates. AD yielded the lowest overall agreement (EA 77%, CA 81%) with BMD in a species dependent manner, with the highest apparent discordance being found among the A. baumannii isolates. While the performance of DD for determination of TGC susceptibility among Enterobacteriaceae was excellent, (CA:100% with no errors), the CA was lower (84%) when it was used for A. baumannii where an unacceptably high minor-error rate was noted (16%). No major error or very major error was detected for any of the tested methods.

conclusionsEtest can be reliably used for TGC susceptibility testing in the three groups of studied bacteria. For the isolates with close-to-breakpoint MICs, testing susceptibility using the reference method is recommended.

Indexed as

Acinetobacter baumanniiAnti-Bacterial AgentsGram-Negative BacteriaHumansMicrobial Sensitivity TestsTigecyclineAnti-Bacterial AgentsTigecyclineAgar dilutionBroth microdilutionDisk diffusionEtestGram-negative bacteriaTigecycline

Identifiers

PMID34315422
PMCPMC8314565
OpenAlexW3184785758

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.