Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30096205›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Evaluation of six decontamination procedures for isolation of Mycobacterium avium complex from avian feces.

Abdul Sattar, Zunita Zakaria, Jalila Abu, Saleha A Aziz, Rojas-Ponce Gabriel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Veterinary world · 2020
    Review
  12. Migratory birds as the potential source for the transmission ofJournal of advanced veterinary and animal research · 2020
    Article
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.

Abdul SattarDepartment of Veterinary Pathology and Microbiology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Universiti Putra Malaysia UPM, Selangor, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0002-8153-0075
Zunita ZakariaDepartment of Veterinary Pathology and Microbiology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Universiti Putra Malaysia UPM, Selangor, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0001-6574-0841
Jalila AbuDepartment of Clinical Studies, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Universiti Putra Malaysia UPM, Selangor, Malaysia.
Saleha A AzizDepartment of Veterinary Pathology and Microbiology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Universiti Putra Malaysia UPM, Selangor, Malaysia.
Rojas-Ponce GabrielDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Culture is considered the gold standard for definitive diagnosis of mycobacterial infections. However, consensus about the most suitable culture procedure for isolation of nontuberculous mycobacteria is lacking. The study compared the recoveries of mycobacteria after decontamination of spiked and fresh avian feces with 4% sodium hydroxide (NaOH), 12% sulfuric acid (H2SO4), or 1% cetylperidinium chloride (CPC), with and without mixture of three antibiotics, namely vancomycin (VAN, 100 μg/ml), nalidixic acid (NAL, 100 μg/ml), and amphotericin B (AMB, 100 μg/ml). The antibiotic mixture was referred to as VNA. Decontamination procedures were evaluated using two (n = 2) avian fecal samples spiked with 106, 104, and 102 CFU/ml of Mycobacterium avium subsp. avium (ATCC 15769) and fresh avian feces (n = 42). M. avium subsp. avium was detected on the culture media from spiked samples (106 and 104 CFU/ml) decontaminated with NaOH, NaOH-VNA, H2SO4, and H2SO4 -VNA for 2-6 weeks. These bacteria were detected in 2-4 weeks when using CPC and CPC-VNA. M. avium subsp. avium cannot be isolated on culture media from spiked samples (102 CFU/ml) decontaminated with any decontaminating agent. Two mycobacterial isolates, namely, Mycobacterium terrae and M. engbaekii, were isolated from field samples decontaminated with NaOH and CPC-VNA. With regard to the contamination rate, the use of CPC-VNA showed lower contamination rates (5.5% and 19.0%) from spiked and field samples than those of the other methods (NaOH: 22.2% and 59.5%, NaOH-VNA: 16.7% and 21.4%, H2SO4: 11.1% and 40.5%, H2SO4-VNA: 5.5% and 21.4%, and CPC: 66.7% and 50%). In conclusion, the decontamination of fecal samples following a two-step procedure with 1% CPC and VNA can ensure high recovery rate of many mycobacteria with the lowest contamination in cultures.

Indexed as

DecontaminationAnimalsAntitubercular AgentsFecesMycobacterium avium ComplexMycobacterium avium-intracellulare InfectionAntitubercular Agents

Identifiers

PMID30096205
PMCPMC6086441

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.