ArticleCurrent microbiology2023
Assessing the Utility of Multiplexed Polymerase Chain Reaction in Detecting Microorganisms Causing Infections in Critically ill Patients.
Article in Current microbiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rapid testing with molecular syndromic panels of patients presenting at the emergency department with pneumonia at risk for multidrug-resistant pathogens.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026Article
- Diagnostics and Decisions: Molecular Test Insights in Shared Decision-Making for Managing Respiratory Infections.Journal of participatory medicine · 2025Article
- Mechanisms and Evolution of Antimicrobial Resistance in Ophthalmology: Surveillance, Clinical Implications, and Future Therapies.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Empirical antimicrobials in the intensive care unit.Intensive care medicine · 2024Article
- Next-generation microbiological testing in intraabdominal infections with PCR technology.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 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
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Early sepsis diagnosis is crucial for implementing adequate antibiotic therapy and for patient survival. This study investigated whether using multiplexed PCR for detecting microorganisms in critical septic patients affects initial antibiotic treatment and compared it to microbiological culture. It also explored scenarios where PCR is more effective in clinical practice. One hundred nineteen specimens (83 blood and 36 respiratory specimens) belonging to 93 patients were analyzed. Multiplexed PCR determinations were performed using the FA-BCID Panel (bioMérieux) for blood samples and the FA-Pneumo for respiratory samples. The mean turnaround times were 1.7 h for the FA-BCID and 1.5h for the FA-Pneumo. Conversely, they were 96.1 h for blood cultures and 72.3 h for respiratory cultures. FA-BCID showed a mean sensitivity of 97% and specificity of 100%. FA-Pneumo showed a sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 90%. However, the positive predictive value was only 39%. Discrepancies were common in polymicrobial samples. Based on the PCR results, initial empirical treatment should have been changed in 71% of patients with bloodstream infections and 61% with respiratory infections. We conclude that multiplexed PCR improves the response time in identifying germs with a high degree of coincidence for blood cultures and moderate for respiratory cultures. These results highlight the importance of PCR in choosing an appropriate antibiotic therapy.
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.