Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30541935›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2019

Reassessment of Routine Midstream Culture in Diagnosis of Urinary Tract Infection.

Sanchutha Sathiananthamoorthy, James Malone-Lee, Kiren Gill, Anna Tymon, Trang K Nguyen, Shradha Gurung, Linda Collins, Anthony S Kupelian, Sheela Swamy, Rajvinder Khasriya and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing 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

40 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
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

12 authors.

Sanchutha SathiananthamoorthyCentre for Nephrology, Division of Medicine, University College London, London, United Kingdom rebmssa@ucl.ac.uk j.rohn@ucl.ac.uk.
James Malone-LeeCentre for Nephrology, Division of Medicine, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Kiren GillCentre for Nephrology, Division of Medicine, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Anna TymonEDI Department of Microbial Diseases, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Trang K NguyenCentre for Nephrology, Division of Medicine, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Shradha GurungCentre for Nephrology, Division of Medicine, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Linda CollinsCentre for Nephrology, Division of Medicine, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Anthony S KupelianCentre for Nephrology, Division of Medicine, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Sheela SwamyCentre for Nephrology, Division of Medicine, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Rajvinder KhasriyaCentre for Nephrology, Division of Medicine, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
David A SprattEDI Department of Microbial Diseases, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Jennifer L RohnCentre for Nephrology, Division of Medicine, University College London, London, United Kingdom rebmssa@ucl.ac.uk j.rohn@ucl.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Midstream urine (MSU) culture remains the gold standard diagnostic test for confirming urinary tract infection (UTI). We previously showed that patients with chronic lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) below the diagnostic cutoff on MSU culture may still harbor bacterial infection and that their antibiotic treatment was associated with symptom resolution. Here, we evaluated the results of the United Kingdom's MSU culture in symptomatic patients and controls. Next, we compared the bacterial enrichment capabilities of the MSU culture with those of a 50-µl uncentrifuged culture, a 30-ml centrifuged sediment culture, and 16S rRNA gene sequencing. This study was conducted on urine specimens from 33 LUTS patients attending their first clinical appointment (mean age, 48.7 years; standard deviation [SD], 16.5 years), 30 LUTS patients on treatment (mean age, 47.8 years; SD, 16.5 years) whose symptoms had relapsed, and 29 asymptomatic controls (mean age, 40.7 years, SD, 15.7 years). We showed that the routine MSU culture, adopting the UK interpretation criteria tailored to acute UTI, failed to detect a variety of bacterial species, including recognized uropathogens. Moreover, the diagnostic MSU culture was unable to discriminate between patients and controls. In contrast, genomic analysis of urine enriched by centrifugation discriminated between the groups, generating a more accurate understanding of species richness. In conclusion, the United Kingdom's MSU protocol misses a significant proportion of bacteria, which include recognized uropathogens, and may be unsuitable for excluding UTI in patients with LUTS.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedBacteriological TechniquesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedUrinalysisUrinary Tract InfectionsYoung Adult16S rRNA gene sequencinglower urinary tract symptomsmidstream urine culturemixed growthurinary tract infection

Identifiers

PMID30541935
PMCPMC6425166

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.