ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Performance of 16S rRNA Gene Next-Generation Sequencing and the Culture Method in the Detection of Bacteria in Clinical Specimens.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. 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.
- Performance and practicality of 16S nanopore sequencing for routine bacterial identification in clinical samples.Microbiology spectrum · 2026Article
- Selective detection of clinically relevant Gram-negative bacteria using a colistin-functionalized ISFET biosensor.BMC microbiology · 2026Article
- Laboratory strategies for the identification of Burkholderia species: From classical phenotyping to advanced genomic and proteomic approaches.Antonie van Leeuwenhoek · 2026Review
- Nonclinical RhizobacteriaJournal of agricultural and food chemistry · 2026Article
- Validation of a long-read 16S rRNA-gene sequencing approach for analysis of clinical samples and bacterial identification in a routine clinical laboratory.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Microbiological diagnostics and their impact on hematology nursing.Folia microbiologica · 2025Review
- Unveiling the Future of Infective Endocarditis Diagnosis: The Transformative Role of Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing in Culture-Negative Cases.Journal of epidemiology and global health · 2025Review
- Clinical diagnostic value of throat swabs in pediatric acute lower respiratory tract infections using targeted next-generation sequencing.BMC pediatrics · 2025Article
- Feasibility and preliminary findings of a bacterial diversity study in periodontitis: a pilot investigation from the Western Cape.Frontiers in oral health · 2025Article
- BioFireAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Effective treatment of infectious diseases requires prompt and accurate bacterial identification and tailored antimicrobial treatments. Traditional culture methods are considered the gold standard, but their effectiveness diminishes for fastidious and hard-to-grow microorganisms. In recent years, molecular diagnostic tools such as 16S rRNA gene next-generation sequencing (16S NGS) have gained popularity in the field. We analysed data from samples submitted for 16S NGS between July 2022 and July 2023 at the Department of Advanced Translational Microbiology in Trieste, Italy. The study included samples submitted for both culture-based identification and 16S NGS. Conventional media were used for culture, and bacterial identification was performed using MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry. The V3 region of the 16S rRNA gene was sequenced using the Ion PGM platform. Among the 123 samples submitted, drainage fluids (38%) and blood (23%) were the most common, with requests predominantly from the Infectious Diseases (31.7%) and Orthopedic (21.13%) Units. In samples collected from patients with confirmed infections, 16S NGS demonstrated diagnostic utility in over 60% of cases, either by confirming culture results in 21% or providing enhanced detection in 40% of instances. Among the 71 patients who had received antibiotic therapies before sampling (mean 2.3 prior antibiotic days), pre-sampling antibiotic consumption did not significantly affect the sensitivity of 16S NGS. In routine microbiology laboratories, combining 16S NGS with culture method enhances the sensitivity of microbiological diagnostics, even when sampling is conducted during 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.