ArticleBMC microbiology2025
Direct identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing of microorganisms from positive blood culture bottles using a membrane filtration method.
Article in BMC microbiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBloodstream infections (BSIs) are a major cause of morbidity and mortality globally. Rapid and accurate pathogen identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) are crucial for timely and effective treatment. Conventional blood culture (BC) workflows are time-consuming, typically requiring 18-48 h. Although integrating matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) with direct AST protocols is promising, certain limitations remain. Therefore, we aimed to establish a faster and more reliable method for the direct identification and AST of microorganisms from positive BC bottles using a membrane filtration-based protocol.
resultsThe membrane filtration-based method achieved an overall identification success rate of 76.5%. Rates were highest for Gram-negative bacteria (88.1%), followed by anaerobes (80.0%), Gram-positive cocci (70.2%), and Gram-positive bacilli (43.8%). Yeast identification was unsuccessful. AST results showed strong concordance with those from the conventional method, with essential agreement (EA) exceeding 95% across all groups. For Gram-negative bacteria, EA was 98% and categorical agreement (CA) was 95.4%, with 3.6%, 0.5%, and 0.5% minor, major, and very major errors, respectively. EA and CA were 96.1% and 94.2% for Gram-positive cocci, and 95.5% and 93.4% for Streptococcus spp.
conclusionsThe membrane filtration-based method, effective for Gram-negative bacteria, reduced turnaround time by 10-12 h compared to conventional workflows. Further optimization can improve accuracy for Gram-positive bacteria and yeast, offering a promising, streamlined workflow to enhance BSI diagnostics and guide targeted antimicrobial therapy.
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.