ArticleFolia microbiologica2018
Difficulties in identifying the bacterial species from the genus Clostridium in a case of injury-related osteitis.
Article in Folia microbiologica, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Phenotypic and genotypic identification of carbapenem resistance in Bacteroides fragilis clinical strains.Medical microbiology and immunology · 2023Review
- Identification and pathogenicity analysis of Streptococcus equinus FMD1, a beta-hemolytic strain isolated from forest musk deer lung.The Journal of veterinary medical science · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Most Clostridium species are part of saprophytic microflora in humans and animals; however, some are well-known human pathogens. We presented the challenges in identifying the Clostridium species isolated from a patient with an infected open dislocation of the proximal interphalangeal joint of the fourth digit of the right hand. The clinical materials were intraoperative samples collected from a patient diagnosed with an injury-related infection, with soft tissue loss and tendon sheath involvement. The available biochemical, molecular, and genetic techniques were used in identifying the isolated bacteria. The isolated bacterium was shown to have low biochemical activity; hence, it was not definitively identified via biochemical tests Api 20A or Rapid 32A. Vitek 2 and mass spectrometry methods were equally inconclusive. Clostridium tetani infection was strongly suspected based on the bacterium's morphology and the appearance of its colonies on solid media. It was only via the 16S rRNA sequencing method, which is non-routine and unavailable in most clinical laboratories, that this pathogen was excluded. Despite appropriate pre-laboratory procedures, which are critical for obtaining reliable test results, the routine methods of anaerobic bacterium identification are not always useful in diagnostics. Diagnostic difficulties occur in the case of environment-derived bacteria of low or not fully understood biological activity, which are absent from databases of automatic bacterial identification systems.
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.