Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26791093›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2016

Antifungal Activity of Propolis Against Yeasts Isolated From Blood Culture: In Vitro Evaluation.

Fatma Mutlu Sariguzel, Elife Berk, Ayes Nedret Koc, Hafize Sav, Gonca Demir

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Natural antibiotics against antimicrobial resistance: sources and bioinspired delivery systems.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2024
    Review
  8. Propolis characterization and antimicrobial activities againstSaudi journal of biological sciences · 2022
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Physicochemical characterization andVeterinary world · 2022
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Chemical and biological characteristics of propolis fromArhiv za higijenu rada i toksikologiju · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Fatma Mutlu SariguzelDepartment of Microbiology, Kayseri Education and Research Hospital, Kayseri, Turkey. fmutluguzel@gmail.com.
Elife BerkDepartment of Microbiology, Erciyes University Medical School, Kayseri, Turkey.
Ayes Nedret KocDepartment of Microbiology, Erciyes University Medical School, Kayseri, Turkey.
Hafize SavDepartment of Microbiology, Erciyes University Medical School, Kayseri, Turkey.
Gonca DemirDepartment of Microbiology, Erciyes University Medical School, Kayseri, Turkey.
Erciyes University · TRKayseri Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDue to the failure of available antifungal agents in the treatment of candidemia and the toxic activities of these drugs, a lot of researches are being conducted to develop new nontoxic and effective antifungal agents for optimal control of fungal pathogens. The aim of this study is to evaluate the in vitro antifungal activity of propolis against yeasts isolated from the blood cultures of intensive care unit patients.

methodsSeventy-six strains were included in this study. The in vitro antifungal activity of propolis, fluconazole (FLU), and itraconazole (ITR) was investigated by the microdilution broth methods (CLSI guidelines M27-A3 for yeast). The propolis sample was collected from Kayseri, Turkey.

resultsOf the 76 isolates, 33 were identified as Candida albicans while 37 were C. parapsilosis, three were C. tropicalis, and three were identified as C. glabrata. The geometric mean range for MIC (μg/ml) with regard to all isolates was 0.077 to 3 μg/ml for FLU and ITR, and 0.375 to 0.70 μg/ml for propolis. It was shown that propolis had significant antifungal activity against all Candida strains and the MIC range of propolis was determined as 0185 to 3 μg/ml.

conclusionThis study demonstrated that propolis had significant antifungal activity against yeasts isolated from blood culture compared with FLU and ITR. The propolis MIC in azole-resistant strains such as C. glabrata was found lower than the FLU MIC.

Indexed as

Blood CultureAntifungal AgentsCandidaFluconazoleHumansItraconazoleMicrobial Sensitivity TestsPropolisAntifungal AgentsFluconazoleItraconazolePropolisCandida sppfluconazolein vitro antifungal activityitraconazolepropolis

Identifiers

PMID26791093
PMCPMC6807121
OpenAlexW2255458782

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.