ArticleCurrent microbiology2024
Rapid Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing Using the MicroScan System: Performance Evaluation of a 4-Hour Bacterial Cultivation From Positive Blood Cultures.
Article in Current microbiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical impact of rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing in patients with bacteremia due to gram-negative bacilli.Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2026Article
- High-throughput clinical antimicrobial susceptibility testing and drug-resistant subpopulation detection in Gram-negative bacteria.Microbiology spectrum · 2025Article
- A Focused Review on Commercially Available Automated Systems for Antibiotic Susceptibility Testing.Journal of tropical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A reliable and above all, rapid antimicrobial susceptibility test (AST) is required for the diganostics of blood stream infections (BSI). In this study, resistance testing using DxM MicroScan WalkAway (MicroScan) from a 4-h subculture is compared with the standard overnight culture (18-24 h). Randomly selected positive blood cultures (PBC, n = 102) with gram-negative bacteria were included in the study. PBC were sub-cultured onto appropriate agar plates and AST by MicroScan was performed after 4 h of incubation and repeated after incubation for 18-24 h as standard. In a total of 1909 drug-strain pairs, the 4-h subculture approach showed a very high essential agreement (EA) (98.6%) and categorical agreement (CA) (97.1%) compared with the standard. The incidence of minor error (mE), major error (ME), very major error (VME), and adjusted very major error (aVME) was 1.1%, 0.4%, 12.9%, and 5.3%, respectively. In summary, the use of 4-h subcultures for resistance testing with the MicroScan offers a very reliable and easy to realize time saving when testing positive blood cultures with gram-negative bacteria.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38981918What 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.