ArticleBMC infectious diseases2023
Diagnostic accuracy of the BioFire® FilmArray® pneumonia panel in COVID-19 patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Real-world experience using multiplex polymerase chain reaction in intensive care unit patients with hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated pneumonia in South Korea.Acute and critical care · 2026Article
- Multiplex PCR for lower respiratory tract infection diagnosis in ICU and non-ICU settings: enhancing diagnostic stewardship in Indian tertiary care.Iranian journal of microbiology · 2025Article
- NanoArrayPAD-X: Nanoprobe Array and 3D-µPAD for the Simultaneous Detection of Respiratory Pathogens and Biomarkers at the Point of Care.Biosensors · 2025Article
- Optimal antibiotic use in the intensive care unit.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Review
- Antibiotic De-Escalation in the Intensive Care Unit: Rationale and Potential Strategies.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Detecting Respiratory Pathogens for Diagnosing Lower Respiratory Tract Infections at the Point of Care: Challenges and Opportunities.Biosensors · 2025Review
- Diagnostic Performance and Impact on Antimicrobial Treatment of a Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction in Critically Ill Patients With Pneumonia: A Multicenter Observational Study (The MORICUP-PCR Study: Morocco ICU Pneumonia-PCR study).Critical care explorations · 2025Observational
- Real-Life Insights into Pertussis Diagnosis: High Yield of PCR Testing and Clinical Outcomes-An Emerging Old Enemy or Just a Sign of PCR Times?Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
- Inconsistencies in the Indian Guidelines for the Prescription of Antibiotics for Critically Ill Patients.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 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
13 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVentilator-Associated pneumonia (VAP) is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients in lower-and-middle-income settings, where timely access to emergency care and accurate diagnostic testing is not widely available. Therefore, rapid microbiological diagnosis is essential to improve effective therapy delivery to affected individuals, preventing adverse outcomes and reducing antimicrobial resistance.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study of patients with suspected VAP and COVID-19, evaluating the diagnostic performance of the BioFire® FilmArray® Pneumonia Panel (FA-PP). Respiratory secretion samples underwent standard microbiological culture and FA-PP assays, and the results were compared.
resultsWe included 252 samples. The traditional culture method detected 141 microorganisms, and FA-PP detected 277, resulting in a sensitivity of 95% and specificity of 60%, with a positive predictive value of 68% and negative predictive value of 93%. In samples with high levels of genetic material (> 10^5 copies/mL), the panel had a sensitivity of 94% and specificity of 86%. In addition, 40% of the culture-negative samples had positive FA-PP® results, of which 35% had > 10^5 copies/mL of genetic material. The most prevalent bacteria were Gram-negative bacilli, followed by Gram-positive cocci. The panel identified 98 genes associated with antimicrobial resistance, predominantly extended-spectrum beta-lactamases (28%).
conclusionThe FA-PP is a sensitive assay for identifying bacteria causing VAP in patients with COVID-19, with a greater capacity to detect bacteria than the conventional method. The timely microbiological recognition offered by this panel could lead to optimized decision-making processes, earlier tailored treatment initiation, and improved antibiotic stewardship practices.
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.