ArticleBMC microbiology2026
Optimizing species identification after antimicrobial pretreatment in Enterobacterales: a prospective cohort study.
Article in BMC microbiology, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInitiation of antimicrobial treatment before specimen collection reduces bacterial recovery rate for cultures and alters Gram-stain morphology of the microbe, but very little is known about the effects to the subsequent species identification once the culture becomes positive. This prospective cohort study assessed the impact of antimicrobial pretreatment effect on species identification of the closely related members of Enterobacterales, using conventional and automated phenotypic (Vitek 2) methods, and matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) in terms of overall accuracy and cost-effectiveness.
resultsA total of 240 Enterobacterales isolates, with visible antimicrobial pretreatment effect (hereafter, the pretreatment effect), were included in the study. On primary culture, the MALDI-TOF MS with a standard cutoff had an inferior success rate (75.0% vs. 97.3%; P < 0.001). Reducing the MALDI-TOF MS cutoff to 1.8 significantly increases its success rate (93.8%) without compromising accuracy (99.6%, vs. benchmark of 100.0%, P = 1). The Vitek 2 automated system maintained high accuracy comparable to the benchmark. Isolates with pretreatment effects had lower prevalence of extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli (25.2% vs. 43.4%; P < 0.001) and Klebsiella pneumoniae (9.5% vs. 30.6%; P < 0.001), and carbapenem-resistant E. coli (0.7% vs. 4.3%; P = 0.027) and K. pneumoniae (3.2% vs. 24.5%; P < 0.001) than the general population. Based on a cost-utility analysis, the conventional phenotypic method was the least cost-effective, while the optimized MALDI-TOF MS method was the most cost-effective.
conclusionsMALDI-TOF MS with reduced cutoffs and the automated phenotypic assay are the most cost-effective and accurate methods for isolates with antimicrobial pretreatment effect. Additionally, this effect may serve as an early indicator of lower antimicrobial resistance.
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.