Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39885964›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2024

Clinical evaluation of a multiplex droplet digital PCR for diagnosing suspected bloodstream infections: a prospective study.

Yaqin Peng, Ruijie Xie, Yifeng Luo, Penghao Guo, Zhongwen Wu, Yili Chen, Pingjuan Liu, Jiankai Deng, Bin Huang, Kang Liao

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article 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 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. 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

10 authors.

Yaqin Peng *Department of Clinical Laboratory, The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Ruijie Xie *Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Yifeng LuoDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Penghao GuoDepartment of Clinical Laboratory, The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Zhongwen WuDepartment of Clinical Laboratory, The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Yili ChenDepartment of Clinical Laboratory, The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Pingjuan LiuDepartment of Clinical Laboratory, The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Jiankai DengDepartment of Clinical Laboratory, The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Bin HuangDepartment of Clinical Laboratory, The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Kang LiaoDepartment of Clinical Laboratory, The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Though droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) has emerged as a promising tool for early pathogen detection in bloodstream infections (BSIs), more studies are needed to support its clinical application widely due to different ddPCR platforms with discrepant diagnostic performance. Additionally, there is still a lack of clinical data to reveal the association between pathogen loads detected by ddPCR and corresponding BSIs. Methods: In this prospective study, 173 patients with suspected BSIs were enrolled. A multiplex ddPCR assay was used to detect 18 pathogens. The results of ddPCR testing were evaluated in comparison with blood cultures (BCs) and clinical diagnosis. Taking BC as the gold standard, receiver operating characteristic curve and Cohen's kappa agreement were used to investigate whether the pathogen load could predict a corresponding culture-proven BSI for the top five microorganisms detected by ddPCR. Results: Of the 173 blood samples collected, BC and ddPCR were positive in 48 (27.7%) and 92 (53.2%) cases, respectively. Compared to BC, the aggregate sensitivity and specificity for ddPCR were 81.3% and 63.2%, respectively. After clinical adjudication, the sensitivity and specificity of ddPCR increased to 88.8% and 86.0%, respectively. There were 143 microorganisms detected by ddPCR. The DNA loads of these microorganisms ranged from 30.0 to 3.2×10 Conclusion: Our results indicate that the multiplex ddPCR is a promising platform as a complementary add-on to conventional BC. The DNA loads of

Indexed as

BacteremiaBacteriaMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesMultiplex Polymerase Chain ReactionSepsisAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBlood CultureDNA, BacterialFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesROC CurveDNA, Bacterialblood culturebloodstream infectiondroplet digital PCRpathogen loadpredictive value

Identifiers

PMID39885964
PMCPMC11779721

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.