Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40676679›Full record

ArticleCritical care (London, England)2025

Diagnostic performance of Pneumonia multiplex PCR in critically ill immunocompromised patients.

Jérémy Contier, Laura Platon, Nacim Benchabane, Sonia Tchakerian, Fanchon Herman, Caroline Mollevi, Patrice Ceballos, Sylvain Godreuil, Kada Klouche

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care (London, England), 2025. 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. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Jérémy ContierDepartment of intensive care medicine, Lapeyronie University Hospital, University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France.
Laura PlatonDepartment of intensive care medicine, Lapeyronie University Hospital, University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France.
Nacim BenchabaneDepartment of intensive care medicine, Lapeyronie University Hospital, University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France.
Sonia TchakerianDepartment of intensive care medicine, Lapeyronie University Hospital, University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France.
Fanchon HermanDepartment of statistics, Lapeyronie University Hospital, University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France.
Caroline MolleviDepartment of statistics, Lapeyronie University Hospital, University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France.
Patrice CeballosDepartment of Hematology, Saint Eloi University Hospital, University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France.
Sylvain GodreuilDepartment of Hematology, Saint Eloi University Hospital, University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France.
Kada KloucheDepartment of intensive care medicine, Lapeyronie University Hospital, University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France. k-klouche@chu-montpellier.fr.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdmissions of immunocompromised patients to intensive care units (ICUs) are on the increase. The main reason for admission is acute respiratory failure, predominantly of infectious origin. In such circumstances, early and appropriate antibiotic therapy guarantees a better prognosis. Rapid diagnostic techniques such as multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) have shown their value in both diagnosis and treatment in immunocompetent patients. To date, little data are available on immunocompromised patients.

methodsIn this retrospective, single-center study, we analyzed data from critically ill immunocompromised patients admitted for acute respiratory failure requiring invasive ventilation, in whom a respiratory specimen was taken and processed simultaneously by BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia Panel multiplex PCR (BFPPm PCR) and conventional culture (CC). Samples had to be taken from deep respiratory tracts less than 48 h after mechanical ventilation. The primary endpoint was the evaluation of the diagnostic performance of BFPP mPCR compared with CC. The secondary endpoint was the therapeutic impact of the results of BFPP mPCR.

resultsOne hundred and fourteen patients were included, with immunosuppression mainly of a hematological (35.1%) and oncological (35.1%) nature. The mPCR positivity rate was 36.8%, with the majority identifying enterobacteria (51%) and a median turnaround time of between 2h30 and 4 h. Comparison of rapid techniques with CC showed sensitivity of 89%, specificity of 83%, predictive positive value of 52% and negative predictive value of 98%. Concordance between the two techniques was complete in 84.2% of cases. mPCR enabled antibiotic therapy to be modified in 17.5% of cases, mainly de-escalation.

conclusionThe use of mPCR in the diagnosis of pneumonia in immunocompromised patients shortens the time required to obtain results, and is particularly effective in eliminating the presence of multi-resistant germs. Bacteria detected in culture and not included in the mPCR spectrum were mostly bacteria of low pathogenicity or sensitive to the antibiotics usually prescribed. The mPCR technique could reduce exposure to broad-spectrum antibiotics in this population.

Indexed as

Immunocompromised HostMultiplex Polymerase Chain ReactionPneumoniaAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCritical IllnessFemaleHumansIntensive Care UnitsMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesAcute respiratory failureAntibioticImmunocompromisedIntensive care unitMultiplex polymerase chain reactionPneumonia

Identifiers

PMID40676679
PMCPMC12272964

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.