ArticleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2026
Impact of ddPCR panel implementation on optimizing antimicrobial therapy management in critically ill patients with bloodstream infections.
Article in Frontiers in cellular and infection 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Bloodstream infections (BSIs) represent a life-threatening complication in critically ill ICU patients. Rapid molecular diagnostic tools such as digital droplet PCR (ddPCR) may facilitate earlier targeted therapy, but their clinical impact on antimicrobial stewardship and patient outcomes remains inadequately characterized. Methods: This single-center, prospective cohort study enrolled ICU critically ill patients with confirmed BSIs between June 2021 and June 2024(ChiCTR2100047526). Patients were assigned to either a ddPCR-guided group, where antibiotic adjustments were made within 24 hours based on ddPCR results, or a standard-of-care group, where therapy was guided by conventional blood culture results. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to adjust for potential confounding. Results: 138 consecutive critically ill patients with BSIs were enrolled and assigned to either the ddPCR-guided group (n = 69) or the standard-of-care group (n = 69). DdPCR significantly reduced turnaround time compared to blood culture (median 0.3 days vs. 3.0 days; p < 0.001). Accordingly, the ddPCR-guided group achieved higher rates of optimal antibiotic therapy by 24 hours (94.2% vs. 46.4%; p < 0.001), antibiotic adjustments mainly involved vancomycin, caspofungin, and agents targeting multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs). Although optimization rates equalized by day 5 and there was no significant difference in 28-day mortality between the two groups, ddPCR guidance was associated with significantly lower in-hospital mortality (36.2% vs. 55.1%; p = 0.026), particularly in patients with Gram-negative bacteremia (33.3% vs. 66.7%; p = 0.005), Gram-negative multidrug-resistant organism bacteremia (40.9% vs. 87.5%; p = 0.006), and persistent BSIs (34.2% vs. 72.0%; p = 0.003). After IPTW adjustment, standard-of-care management was associated with an increased in-hospital mortality rate compared with ddPCR-guided management (standard-of-care group vs. ddPCR-guided group: IRR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.01-2.14, p = 0.045). Conclusions: Integrating ddPCR into routine ICU antimicrobial stewardship significantly shortened time to optimal therapy and improved survival, especially in high-risk BSI subgroups.
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.