Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Mais filtros








Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Shock ; 34(1): 27-30, 2010 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20090568

RESUMO

The rapid detection of pathogens in blood is critical for a favorable outcome of patients with suspected sepsis. Although blood culture (BC) is considered the criterion standard for diagnosis of bloodstream infection, it often takes several days to detect the causative organism. In this study, we compared BC with a commercially available multiplex real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay to detect bacteria and fungi in blood samples from 144 patients admitted to the emergency department with suspected sepsis. Of 144 blood samples examined, 91 (63%) were negative by both methods and 53 (37%) were positive by at least one of the two methods. In 30 among all positive cases (56.6%),both methods identified the same organisms, in 13 cases (24.5%), BC identified organisms not detected by real-time PCR,and in 10 cases (18.9%), SeptiFast PCR assay gave positive results, whereas the BC was negative. In this study, we wished to compare SeptiFast results obtained by standard procedures, but future clinical studies are necessary to define SeptiFast PCR as support for BC in the early diagnosis of severe bloodstream infections.


Assuntos
Bactérias/patogenicidade , Fungos/patogenicidade , Sepse/sangue , Sepse/microbiologia , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Bactérias/genética , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência , Feminino , Fungos/genética , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Reação em Cadeia da Polimerase , Adulto Jovem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA