ArticleCurrent microbiology2014
Quantification of bacterial uropathogens in preclinical samples using real-time PCR assays.
Article in Current microbiology, 2014. 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.
- Intestinal microbiology and urinary tract infection associated risk in long-term aged care residents.Communications medicine · 2024Article
- Novel scoring system for early diagnosis of necrotizing enterocolitis: integrating clinical and laboratory data with urinary caveolin-1 levels.Archives of medical science : AMS · 2024Article
- Development and utilization of a custom PCR array workflow: analysis of gene expression in mycoplasma genitalium and guinea pig (Cavia porcellus).Molecular biotechnology · 2015Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Uropathogenic Escherichia coli (UPEC) and Staphylococcus saprophyticus (S. saprophyticus) are responsible for the majority of community-acquired urinary tract infections (UTI). Agar plating, a gold standard for detection of bacterial uropathogens, is labor intensive, limited for distinguishing between environmental contaminants and pathogens, and fails to effectively detect mixed infections. A reliable method for specific and sensitive quantitative assessment of infections would allow cost-effective evaluation of large numbers of experimental samples. A methodology such as quantitative PCR (qPCR) addresses the limitations of agar plating. We developed and validated highly specific and sensitive qPCR assays to assist researchers in the evaluation of potential vaccines and interventions in preclinical models of UPEC and S. saprophyticus UTI. The developed UPEC PCR targeted a highly conserved region of the UPEC hemolysin D (hlyD) gene that reproducibly detected type strains CFT073 and J96 over a 9 log range with high precision. To quantify S. saprophyticus genomes, a separate qPCR assay targeting the Trk transport gene was developed with an 8 log range. Neither assay detected bacterial species predicted to be sample contaminants. Using our optimized workflow that includes automated steps, up to 200 urine or tissue samples can be processed in as few as 3 h. Additionally, sequence comparisons of our primers and probe to other UTI bacterial strains indicated the broad applicability of these assays. These optimized qPCR assays provide a cost-effective and time-saving method for quantification of bacterial burdens in tissues and body fluids to assess the effectiveness of candidate vaccines or interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24114413What 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.