Cited by 318Sepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentBacterial Identification and Susceptibility TestingInflammation biomarkers and pathways

Endotoxemia: Methods of detection and clinical correlates

Open access
Hurley, J C·1995·Clinical Microbiology Reviews

Abstract

As an assay for endotoxin, the Limulus amebocyte lysate assay has several desirable properties: sensitivity, specificity, and potential for adaptation to a quantitative format. Several modifications have been developed to enhance its potential for clinical application. The modifications that allow quantitative measurement of endotoxin and also improve its application to blood samples are described in this review. In fluids other than blood, the detection of endotoxin with the Limulus amebocyte lysate assay can be used as an aid to identify the presence of gram-negative bacteria, and the assay has established utility. With blood, however, there are a range of factors that interfere with the detection of endotoxemia and there are disparate views with respect to the diagnostic and prognostic significance of the test results. In general, the clinical significance of the finding of endotoxemia broadly parallels the frequency and importance of gram-negative sepsis in the patient groups studied and a decline in endotoxin levels accompanies clinical improvement. However, with therapies designed to reduce levels of endotoxin, or to antagonize its effects, it is unclear whether clinical improvement occurs as a consequence of changes in the levels of endotoxemia.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1128/cmr.8.2.268

Cites

423 of 423 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hurley, J. C.
Affiliations
Seattle Children's Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
Hurley, J C
Venue
Clinical Microbiology Reviews
Published
1995-04
Volume
8
Issue
2
Pages
268-292
ISSN
  • 0893-8512 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-6618
OpenAlex
W2134508859
Cited by
318
References
423
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 20
FWCI
6.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Clinical Microbiology Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Clinical Biochemistry › Bacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Inflammation biomarkers and pathways
Keywords
endotoxemia, Limulus amebocyte lysate assay, endotoxin detection, gram-negative sepsis, blood culture, assay interference, Gram-negative bacteria, endotoxin antagonists
MeSH terms
Endotoxins, Humans, Limulus Test, Risk Factors, Toxemia, Treatment Outcome, Sepsis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review