Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38895732›Full record

Observational studyFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2024

Clinical evaluation of droplet digital PCR in the early identification of suspected sepsis patients in the emergency department: a prospective observational study.

Sen Jiang, Dongyang Zhao, Chunxue Wang, Xiandong Liu, Qian Yang, Xiaowei Bao, Tiancao Dong, Gen Li, Yi Gu, Yangqin Ye and 5 more

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. CISepsis: a causal inference framework for early sepsis detection.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Sen Jiang *Department of Internal Emergency Medicine, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Dongyang Zhao *Department of Internal Emergency Medicine, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Chunxue Wang *Department of Internal Emergency Medicine, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Xiandong LiuDepartment of Internal Emergency Medicine, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Qian YangDepartment of Internal Emergency Medicine, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Xiaowei BaoDepartment of Internal Emergency Medicine, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Tiancao DongDepartment of Internal Emergency Medicine, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Gen LiSchool of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China.
Yi GuDepartment of Internal Emergency Medicine, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Yangqin YeSchool of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China.
Bingke SunDepartment of Internal Emergency Medicine, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Shumin XuDepartment of Internal Emergency Medicine, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Xiaohui ZhouSchool of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China.
Lieying FanSchool of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China.
Lunxian TangDepartment of Internal Emergency Medicine, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Rapid and accurate diagnosis of the causative agents is essential for clinical management of bloodstream infections (BSIs) that might induce sepsis/septic shock. A considerable number of suspected sepsis patients initially enter the health-care system through an emergency department (ED), hence it is vital to establish an early strategy to recognize sepsis and initiate prompt care in ED. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance and clinical value of droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) assay in suspected sepsis patients in the ED. Methods: This was a prospective single-centered observational study including patients admitted to the ED from 25 October 2022 to 3 June 2023 with suspected BSIs screened by Modified Shapiro Score (MSS) score. The comparison between ddPCR and blood culture (BC) was performed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of ddPCR for BSIs. Meanwhile, correlative analysis between ddPCR and the inflammatory and prognostic-related biomarkers were conducted to explore the relevance. Further, the health economic evaluation of the ddPCR was analyzed. Results: 258 samples from 228 patients, with BC and ddPCR performed simultaneously, were included in this study. We found that ddPCR results were positive in 48.13% (103 of 214) of episodes, with identification of 132 pathogens. In contrast, BC only detected 18 positives, 88.89% of which were identified by ddPCR. When considering culture-proven BSIs, ddPCR shows an overall sensitivity of 88.89% and specificity of 55.61%, the optimal diagnostic power for quantifying BSI through ddPCR is achieved with a copy cutoff of 155.5. We further found that ddPCR exhibited a high accuracy especially in liver abscess patients. Among all the identified virus by ddPCR, EBV has a substantially higher positive rate with a link to immunosuppression. Moreover, the copies of pathogens in ddPCR were positively correlated with various markers of inflammation, coagulation, immunity as well as prognosis. With high sensitivity and specificity, ddPCR facilitates precision antimicrobial stewardship and reduces health care costs. Conclusions: The multiplexed ddPCR delivers precise and quantitative load data on the causal pathogen, offers the ability to monitor the patient's condition and may serve as early warning of sepsis in time-urgent clinical situations as ED. Importance: Early detection and effective administration of antibiotics are essential to improve clinical outcomes for those with life-threatening infection in the emergency department. ddPCR, an emerging tool for rapid and sensitive pathogen identification used as a precise bedside test, has developed to address the current challenges of BSI diagnosis and precise treatment. It characterizes sensitivity, specificity, reproducibility, and absolute quantifications without a standard curve. ddPCR can detect causative pathogens and related resistance genes in patients with suspected BSIs within a span of three hours. In addition, it can identify polymicrobial BSIs and dynamically monitor changes in pathogenic microorganisms in the blood and can be used to evaluate antibiotic efficacy and survival prognosis. Moreover, the copies of pathogens in ddPCR were positively correlated with various markers of inflammation, coagulation, immunity. With high sensitivity and specificity, ddPCR facilitates precision antimicrobial stewardship and reduces health care costs.

Indexed as

Early DiagnosisEmergency Service, HospitalPolymerase Chain ReactionSepsisAdultAgedBiomarkersBlood CultureFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityBiomarkersbloodstream infectionsclinical validationdroplet digital PCRemergency departmentsepsis

Identifiers

PMID38895732
PMCPMC11183271

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.