ReviewRevista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia2026
Situation and questions regarding the practice of blood cultures in paediatric patients: an opinion paper.
Review in Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The collection and interpretation of blood cultures in paediatric patients require specific considerations that make simple extrapolation from adult recommendations inappropriate. In recent years, the incidence and aetiology of paediatric bacteraemia have evolved, influenced by vaccination programmes, improved infection prevention strategies, and increasing clinical complexity, particularly in neonatal, oncohaematological, and intensive care settings. Clinical guidelines recommend blood cultures in neonates and infants with fever without a focus in children with sepsis or shock, with immunosuppression, suspected endovascular infection, meningitis, osteoarticular infections, or severe community-acquired pneumonia. Conversely, routine use is discouraged in clearly viral infections and in mild cases in previously healthy children. Available evidence consistently identifies the volume of blood inoculated as the main determinant of diagnostic performance, and this should be adjusted for age and weight. Obtaining one or two appropriately indicated peripheral blood culture sets, together with proper antisepsis, reduces contamination and improves clinical interpretation. Whenever feasible, both aerobic and anaerobic bottles should be included, given their complementary diagnostic yield. There is no robust evidence that paediatric bottles with smaller broth volumes provide substantial advantages over standard bottles when adequate blood volumes are inoculated. Importantly, no evidence demonstrates that the type of bottle or automated system used influences hospital stay, clinical outcomes, or mortality. This article presents an evidence-informed perspective that integrates current literature with expert clinical judgment, derived from more than four decades of experience at a high-complexity tertiary-care hospital.
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.