English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Molecular-based techniques reduce the delay in diagnosing infectious diseases and therefore contribute to better patient outcomes. We assessed the FilmArray blood culture identification (BCID) panel (Biofire Diagnostics/bioMérieux) directly on clinical specimens other than blood: cerebrospinal, joint, pleural and ascitic fluids, bronchoscopy samples and abscesses. We compared the results from 88 samples obtained by culture-based techniques. The percentage of agreement between the two methods was 75 % with a Cohen κ value of 0.51. Global sensitivity and specificity using the FilmArray BCID panel were 71 and 97 %, respectively. Sensitivity was poorer in samples with a low bacterial load, such as ascitic and pleural fluids (25 %), whereas the sensitivity for abscess samples was high (89 %). These findings suggest that the FilmArray BCID panel could be useful to perform microbiological diagnosis directly from samples other than positive blood cultures, as it offers acceptable sensitivity and moderate agreement with conventional microbiological methods. Nevertheless, cost-benefit studies should be performed before introducing this method into algorithms for microbiological diagnostics.

Efficacy of the FilmArray blood culture identification panel for direct molecular diagnosis of infectious diseases from samples other than blood