SynthesisAnnals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials2024
Usefulness of sonication in the microbiological diagnosis of cardiovascular implantable electronic device infections: systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression.
Synthesis in Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials, 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.
- Biofilms in clinical infection: pathophysiology, diagnosis, and the evolving therapeutic landscape.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMultiple studies have demonstrated the utility of sonication to improve culture yield in patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) infections.
objectiveTo analyze the usefulness of sonication in the microbiological diagnosis of CIED infections in comparison with traditional cultures.
methodsSystematic database searches were performed to identify studies that provided enough data concerning both sensitivity and specificity of traditional (non-sonicated) and sonicated cultures from CIED samples. The diagnostic accuracy measures were obtained by three different statistical approaches: (i) The univariate model; (ii) The bivariate random; and (iii) The Bayesian bivariate hierarchical model. Heterogeneity was assessed using meta-regression.
findingsNine studies met the criteria for inclusion in the meta-analysis (1684 cultures). The summary estimates of sensitivity were higher for sonicated cultures (0.756) in comparison with non-sonicated cultures (0.446). On meta-regression, sonication of CIEDs significantly increased the sensitivity (p = 0.001) as well as the rates of false positive results (p = 0.003). The final model also showed that the studies that used a threshold for positivity were associated with lower rates of false positive results (p < 0.001).
interpretationOur results suggest that sonication improves the microbiological diagnosis of CIED infections in comparison with traditional cultures, but a standardization of processes is necessary.
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.