ArticleMicrobiology spectrum2025
Rapid and accurate sepsis diagnostics via a novel probe-based multiplex real-time PCR system.
Article in Microbiology spectrum, 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 early screening and diagnosis of sepsis: a narrative review.Frontiers in cellular and infection 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Sepsis is a critical clinical emergency that requires prompt diagnosis and intervention. Its prevalence has increased due to the aging population and increased antibiotic resistance. Early identification and the use of innovative technologies are crucial for improving patient outcomes. Modern methodologies are needed to minimize the turnaround time for diagnosis and improve outcomes. Rapid diagnostic tests and multiplex PCR are effective but have limitations in identifying a range of pathogens and target genes. Our study evaluated two novel probe-based multiplex real-time PCR systems: the SEPSI ID and SEPSI DR panels. These systems can quickly identify bacterial and fungal pathogens, alongside antibiotic resistance genes. The assays cover 29 microorganisms (gram-negative bacteria, gram-positive bacteria, yeast, and mold species), alongside 23 resistance genes and four virulence factors. A streamlined workflow uses 2 µL of broth from positive blood cultures (BCs) without nucleic acid extraction and provides results in approximately 1 h. We present the results from an evaluation of 228 BCs and 22 isolates previously characterized by whole-genome sequencing. In comparison to the reference methods, the SEPSI ID panel demonstrated a sensitivity of 96.88%, a specificity of 100%, and a PPV of 100%, whereas the SEPSI DR panel showed a sensitivity of 97.8%, a PPV of 89.7%, and a specificity of 96.7%. Both panels also identified additional pathogens and resistance-related targets not detected by conventional methods. This assay shows promise for rapidly and accurately diagnosing sepsis. Future studies should validate its performance in various clinical settings to enhance sepsis management and improve patient outcomes.IMPORTANCEWe present a new diagnostic method that enables the quick and precise identification of pathogens and resistance genes from positive blood cultures, eliminating the need for nucleic acid extraction. This technique can also be used on fresh pathogen cultures. It has the potential to greatly improve treatment protocols, leading to better patient outcomes, more responsible antibiotic use, and more efficient management of healthcare resources.
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.