ArticleThe Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy2021
Verification of analytical bacterial spectrum of QIAstat-Dx® GI V2 and Novodiag® Bacterial GE+ V2-0 diagnostic panels.
Article in The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Understanding the bacteriome, phageome and phage-associated bacteriome in healthy Vietnamese children under two years of age.Archives of microbiology · 2026Article
- Performance evaluation of the Biosynex AMPLIQUICK Fecal Bacteriology PCR kit.BMC microbiology · 2025Article
- Epidemiology of gastrointestinal infections: lessons learned from syndromic testing, Region Zealand, Denmark.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2023Article
- Imported spring onions related to the first recorded outbreak of enteroinvasiveEuro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2023Article
- Yersinia enterocolitica in Crohn's disease.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2023Review
- First Description of a Yersinia pseudotuberculosis Clonal Outbreak in France, Confirmed Using a New Core Genome Multilocus Sequence Typing Method.Microbiology spectrum · 2022Article
- Syndromic testing for the diagnosis of infectious diseases: the right test if used for the right patient.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImplementing multiplex PCR or syndromic panel-based testing platforms to detect microbial species that cause acute diarrhoea may guide patient management more effectively and efficiently.
objectivesTo assess and compare the performance of two syndromic panel-based testing systems, QIAstat-Dx® Gastrointestinal Panel V2 (QGI) and the Novodiag® Bacterial GE+ V2-0 (NGE).
methodsThe QGI and NGE panels include 16 and 14 bacterial gastrointestinal pathogens, respectively. The performance of the panels was tested retrospectively using 141 positive clinical stool specimens, External Quality Assessment (EQA) panels and spiked faecal specimens.
resultsFor Campylobacter jejuni and coli (n = 20), Salmonella (n = 24), Shigella (n = 13), Yersinia enterocolitica (non-1A biotypes) (n = 8), Clostridioides difficile (n = 24) and Vibrio parahaemolyticus (n = 2), QGI correctly verified 19/20, 20/24, 13/13, 8/8, 23/24 and 2/2, whereas NGE correctly verified 20/20, 17/24, 13/13, 8/8, 14/24 and 1/2. Among diarrhoeagenic Escherichia coli (n = 29), QGI reported one Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC) stx1a O26:H11 as STEC serotype O157:H7 and NGE failed on one enteropathogenic E. coli, one enteroaggregative E. coli and one STEC (stx2e). Y. enterocolitica biotype 1A (non-pathogenic) (n = 6) were all positive in QGI, but negative in NGE.
conclusionsBoth QGI and NGE testing panels can improve laboratory workflow and patient management by providing user-friendly platforms that can rapidly detect a number of targets with one specimen. QGI was significantly more sensitive in identifying C. difficile. Both methods had suboptimal detection of Salmonella and this needs to be examined further. The short hands-on time and turnaround time are of value for on-demand testing and use in a high-throughput setting.
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.