ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2022
The Diagnostic Values of Peptidoglycan, Lipopolysaccharide, and (1,3)-Beta-D-Glucan in Patients with Suspected Bloodstream Infection: A Single Center, Prospective Study.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- VX-702 Ameliorates the Severity of Sepsis-Associated Acute Kidney Injury by Downregulating Inflammatory Factors in Macrophages.Journal of inflammation research · 2024Article
- Editorial: Invasive fungal diseases: pathogen detection and diagnosis development.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to assess the diagnostic values of peptidoglycan (PGN), lipopolysaccharide (LPS) and (1,3)-Beta-D-Glucan (BDG) in patients with suspected bloodstream infection. We collected 493 heparin anticoagulant samples from patients undergoing blood culture in Peking Union Medical College Hospital from November 2020 to March 2021. The PGN, LPS, and BDG in the plasma were detected using an automatic enzyme labeling analyzer, GLP-F300. The diagnostic efficacy for PGN, LPS, and BDG were assessed by calculating the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). This study validated that not only common bacteria and fungi, but also some rare bacteria and fungi, could be detected by testing the PGN, LPS, and BDG, in the plasma. The sensitivity, specificity, and total coincidence rate were 83.3%, 95.6%, and 94.5% for PGN; 77.9%, 95.1%, and 92.1% for LPS; and 83.8%, 96.9%, and 95.9% for BDG, respectively, which were consistent with the clinical diagnosis. The positive rates for PGN, LPS, and BDG and the multi-marker detection approach for PGN, LPS, and BDG individually were 11.16%, 17.65%, and 9.13%, and 32.86% significantly higher than that of the blood culture (p < 0.05). The AUC values for PGN, LPS, and BDG were 0.881 (0.814−0.948), 0.871 (0.816−0.925), and 0.897 (0.825−0.969), separately, which were higher than that of C-reactive protein (0.594 [0.530−0.659]) and procalcitonin (0.648 [0.587−0.708]). Plasma PGN, LPS, and BDG performs well in the early diagnosis of bloodstream infections caused by Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacterial and fungal pathogens.
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.