ArticleInfection and drug resistance2021
Direct-on-Target Microdroplet Growth Assay for Detection of Bacterial Resistance in Positive Blood Cultures.
Article in Infection and drug resistance, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rapid MALDI-TOF MS antimicrobial susceptibility testing with the MBT FAST assay.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2026Article
- Detection of methicillin resistance of Staphylococcus aureus in vitreous humor using MALDI-TOF MS and Fc-MBL@FeScientific reports · 2024Article
- A PCR-Reverse Dot Blot Hybridization Based Microfluidics Detection System for the Rapid Identification of 13 Fungal Pathogens Directly After Blood Cultures Over a Period of Time.Infection and drug resistance · 2023Article
- Rapid Identification and Drug Sensitivity Test to Urinary Tract Infection Pathogens by DOT-MGA.Infection and drug resistance · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe recently developed DOT-MGA (direct-on-target microdroplet growth assay) has shown the desirability of direct application of this approach in positive blood cultures and its good performance in detection. This study selected 44 Enterobacteriaceae strains and implemented a DOT-MGA assay on blood cultures to detect their resistance to seven antibiotics. The results of DOT-MGA were compared with the other two antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) methods to analyze the detection performance of DOT-MGA.
methodsWe adopted the differential centrifugation to process positive blood-culture (BC). Processed BC broth was directly used for rapid AST using DOT-MGA. Droplets of 6 µL with and without antibiotics at the EUCAST breakpoint concentration were spotted in triplicates onto the surface of a MALDI target. The plates were incubated in a wet box for 4 h before the broth was removed with filter paper. Bruker Biotyper software was used to analyze the test results compared with standard database, and the scores were used to quantify and determine the results.
resultsDOT-MGA results were compared with the direct-from-BC disk-diffusion method and results were reported by broth microdilution method, respectively. The comparison demonstrated a 100% growth efficiency in DOT-MGA, a 100% classification consistency for ampicillin, ceftriaxone, and gentamicin, and >93% classification consistency for tobramycin, aztreonam, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX), and ceftazidime. DISCUSSION: These study results have shown that DOT-MGA is suitable for directly identifying bacterial resistance to positive blood cultures in clinical microbiology laboratories. Furthermore, it is conducive for early diagnosis and treatment of patients with bloodstream infection due to its convenience, time efficiency, and good performance in identifying multiple antibiotic-insensitive bacteria.
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.