ArticlePloS one2013
Staphylococcus lugdunensis cultured from the amniotic fluid at Caesarean Section.
Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Antimicrobial effects of nanosilver/polyethylene glycol/chitosan in cesarean section and their impact on breastfeeding rates.BMC surgery · 2025Article
- Amniotic fluid C-reactive protein as a predictor of infection in caesarean section: a feasibility study.Scientific reports · 2018Observational
- Infective endocarditis in pregnancy: Case report and review of the literature.Obstetric medicine · 2015Article
- Unbiased species-level identification of clinical isolates of coagulase-negative Staphylococci: does it change the perspective on Staphylococcus lugdunensis?Journal of clinical microbiology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Staphylococcus lugdunensis is a virulent coagulase-negative staphylococcus. It behaves like and can be mistaken in culture for Staphylococcus aureus. While originally thought to be a skin commensal rarely responsible for opportunistic infection, it was rapidly established as a significant human pathogen. It has been mainly associated with native and prosthetic valve endocarditis, osteomyelitis, and skin and soft tissue cellulitis, but has also been reported as a cause of fasciitis as well as peritonitis. Staphylococcus lugdunensis has been reported as a cause of endometritis but has not been previously isolated from amniotic fluid. Here, amniotic fluid samples were collected in the course of a larger study on amniotic fluid bacteriology, with prior ethical approval and informed patient consent. Amniotic fluid was obtained at Caesarean Section by direct needle aspiration from the intact amnion. Analysis with Staphylococcal API test kits led to identification of Staphylococcus lugdunensis in two cases. The clinical significance of the finding in these reported cases is undetermined. Staphylococcus lugdunensis has been shown to be a cause of serious and potentially fatal morbidities, but this is the first report of its culture from amniotic fluid. As caesarean delivery is accepted as the single most important factor associated with post-partum infectious complications in both mother and neonate, the identification of this pathogen is a new concern.
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.