ArticlemSphere
Comparative Analysis of Bacterial Community Composition and Structure in Clinically Symptomatic and Asymptomatic Central Venous Catheters.
Article in mSphere. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Microbiological analysis of tunneled hemodialysis catheters isolated from patients receiving hemodialysis in Saskatchewan.Future microbiology · 2024Article
- Phyto-assisted synthesis of zinc oxide nanoparticles for developing antibiofilm surface coatings on central venous catheters.Frontiers in chemistry · 2023Article
- Metagenomic Assessment of the Pathogenic Risk of Microorganisms in Sputum of Postoperative Patients With Pulmonary Infection.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022Article
- Retrospective Analysis of Microbial Colonization Patterns in Central Venous Catheters, 2013-2017.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2019Article
- Article
- Probiotic Escherichia coli inhibits biofilm formation of pathogenic E. coli via extracellular activity of DegP.Scientific reports · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Totally implanted venous access ports (TIVAPs) are commonly used catheters for the management of acute or chronic pathologies. Although these devices improve health care, repeated use of this type of device for venous access over long periods of time is also associated with risk of colonization and infection by pathogenic bacteria, often originating from skin. However, although the skin microbiota is composed of both pathogenic and nonpathogenic bacteria, the extent and the consequences of TIVAP colonization by nonpathogenic bacteria have rarely been studied. Here, we used culture-dependent and 16S rRNA gene-based culture-independent approaches to identify differences in bacterial colonization of TIVAPs obtained from two French hospitals. To explore the relationships between nonpathogenic organisms colonizing TIVAPs and the potential risk of infection, we analyzed the bacterial community parameters between TIVAPs suspected (symptomatic) or not (asymptomatic) of infection. Although we did not find a particular species assemblage or community marker to distinguish infection risk on an individual sample level, we identified differences in bacterial community composition, diversity, and structure between clinically symptomatic and asymptomatic TIVAPs that could be explored further. This study therefore provides a new view of bacterial communities and colonization patterns in intravascular TIVAPs and suggests that microbial ecology approaches could improve our understanding of device-associated infections and could be a prognostic tool to monitor the evolution of bacterial communities in implants and their potential susceptibility to infections.
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.