ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2025
Comparison of six different methods used in detection of colistin resistance in extensively drug-resistant K. pneumoniae, A. baumannii and P. aeruginosa isolates with the reference method broth microdilution method.
Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2025. 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.
- Prevalence of Colistin-ResistantMicroorganisms · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the agreement of different methods with the reference method in the detection of colistin resistance in extensively drug-resistant K. pneumoniae, A. baumannii and P. aeruginosa isolates. MATERIALS AND
methodsK. pneumoniae, A. baumannii and P. aeruginosa isolates were included in the study. All isolates were subjected to colistin susceptibility testing with seven different methods. All results were compared with broth microdilution results. Categorical agreement (CA), very majorl error (VME) and major error (ME) rates were calculated for the tested methods.
resultsIn all methods, VME and ME rates were found to be above the acceptable performance limit for all strains. Although VME rates were above the target value in all strains, the lowest VME rates were detected in MRRP-NP with 12.5%. Among all isolates, the lowest ME rate was obtained in MCLDE with 10% and the highest ME rate was detected in VITEK 2
conclusionsThe results obtained in this study show that the methods used in colistin susceptibility testing still need standardization. There is an urgent need for a colistin susceptibility testing method that is easy to apply, inexpensive and suitable for routine use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39718679What 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.