Evidence Hub

Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) and Conventional Methods for Diagnosing Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia in ICU Settings: A Systematic Review

Aalaa Salih Fadel Yosif, Gidaa Khalid Eltayeb Blado, Mohamed Awad Bashir Eltayeb, Nada Abdelrahman Shamina, Mohamed Abass Ahmed Abdalaziz, Amina Osman

Cureus, 2025

1 citation

Abstract

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a prevalent and serious infection in intensive care units (ICUs), with timely and accurate diagnosis being crucial for patient outcomes. Conventional diagnostic methods, primarily culture-based, are hampered by long turnaround times and limited sensitivity. Multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) (mPCR) offers rapid detection of multiple pathogens and resistance genes, potentially revolutionizing VAP diagnosis and antimicrobial stewardship. This systematic review aims to compare the diagnostic performance and clinical impact of mPCR versus conventional methods for diagnosing VAP in ICU settings. This review was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. A comprehensive search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library was performed for studies published between 2020 and 2025. Eligible studies compared mPCR with conventional culture in ICU patients with suspected VAP and reported diagnostic accuracy metrics. Study quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. A qualitative synthesis was performed due to significant heterogeneity among the included studies. Fifteen studies were included. mPCR demonstrated high pooled sensitivity and specificity, with a consistently high negative predictive value (NPV) frequently approaching 100%. This high NPV provides a strong rationale for discontinuing unnecessary antibiotics when results…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free