ArticleScientific reports2025
Simple dual filter workflow for facilitating blood culture-free and sensitive detection of pathogenic bacteria from blood.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Recent Advances in Bacterial Separation and Enrichment from Blood for the Diagnosis of Bloodstream Infections.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
Bloodstream infections (BSI) caused by pathogenic bacteria are a global health threat, highlighting the need for improved diagnostic methods. Current methods, such as mass spectrometry, depend on time-consuming blood cultures, which hinder timely diagnosis. Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) offer potential for sensitive bacteria detection but are bottlenecked by the inability to isolate bacteria at low concentrations from blood. This study introduces a facile dual filter workflow for isolating low concentrations of bacteria from blood without blood culture. The workflow, which involves blood dilution and osmolysis, blood cell filtration, chemical and enzymatic lysis, and filter-based bacteria capture, can be completed in ~ 30 min without special equipment. It readily combines with downstream broad-based bacteria detection via PCR and high-resolution melt (HRM), as well as pheno-molecular antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) via PCR. When coupled with species-specific PCR, ~ 10 CFU of bacteria in 0.5 mL of blood could be detected. The small sample volume is particularly attractive because it is comparable to those obtained from fingerstick collections or pediatric patients. With further optimization, testing with a wider range of bacteria, and integration with rapid point-of-care testing, this simple dual filter workflow can be a key driver for advancing blood culture-free bacterial BSI diagnosis, especially in resource-limited settings.
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.