ArticleChest2024
Microbiome Profiling Demonstrates Concordance of Endotracheal Tube Aspirates With Direct Lower Airway Sampling in Intubated Patients.
Article in Chest, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Research Priorities for Noninvasive Sampling of the Lower Respiratory Tract during Acute Respiratory Failure: An Official American Thoracic Society Workshop Report.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEndotracheal aspirates (ETAs) are widely used for microbiologic studies of the respiratory tract in intubated patients. However, they involve sampling through an established endotracheal tube using suction catheters, both of which can acquire biofilms that may confound results. RESEARCH QUESTION: Does standard clinical ETA in intubated patients accurately reflect the authentic lower airway bacterial microbiome? STUDY DESIGN AND
methodsComprehensive quantitative bacterial profiling using 16S rRNA V1-V2 gene sequencing was applied to compare bacterial populations captured by standard clinical ETA vs contemporaneous gold standard samples acquired directly from the lower airways through a freshly placed sterile tracheostomy tube. The study included 13 patients undergoing percutaneous tracheostomy following prolonged (median, 15 days) intubation. Metrics of bacterial composition, diversity, and relative quantification were applied to samples.
resultsPre-tracheostomy ETAs closely resembled the gold standard immediate post-tracheostomy airway microbiomes in bacterial composition and community features of diversity and quantification. Endotracheal tube and suction catheter biofilms also resembled cognate ETA and fresh tracheostomy communities.
interpretationUnbiased molecular profiling shows that standard clinical ETA sampling has good concordance with the authentic lower airway microbiome in intubated patients.
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.