ArticlePloS one2019
Serological and molecular detection of Bartonella henselae in specimens from patients with suspected cat scratch disease in Italy: A comparative study.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 53 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical and epidemiological features of cat-scratch disease: a 16-year case retrospective study in a portuguese tertiary care centre.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026Article
- A case of atypical cat scratch disease with bone and joint infection diagnosed through clinical metagenomics.IDCases · 2026Article
- Article
- Suspected Hepatosplenic Cat Scratch Disease with No Major Symptoms and Negative Serology: A Case Report.The American journal of case reports · 2025Article
- Experimental Infection of Ferrets withPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A customizable multiplex protein microarray for antibody testing and its application for tick-borne and other infectious diseases.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Exploring the Zoonotic Risk ofTransboundary and emerging diseases · 2025Article
- Cat scratch disease in children with nocturnal fever: A case report.World journal of clinical cases · 2024Article
- Clinical Presentation of Cat Scratch Disease in Pediatric Patients-A Single-Center Study.Turkish archives of pediatrics · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
- Bartonella- and Borrelia-Related Disease Presenting as a Neurological Condition Revealing the Need for Better Diagnostics.Microorganisms · 2024Article
- Optic Neuritis and Vertebral Osteomyelitis: An Uncommon Presentation of Cat-Scratch Disease.Cureus · 2024Article
- A Man in His Forties with Recurrent Cat-Scratch Disease.Case reports in infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Association between the Clinical, Laboratory and Ultrasound Characteristics and the Etiology of Peripheral Lymphadenopathy in Children.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Utility of Polymerase Chain Reaction Versus Serology-Based Testing in Immunocompromised Patients WithOpen forum infectious diseases · 2023Article
- ProfilingJournal of veterinary science · 2023Article
- Article
- Limitations of Serological Diagnosis of Typical Cat Scratch Disease and Recommendations for the Diagnostic Procedure.The Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale · 2023Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cat scratch disease (CSD) is an infectious disease caused by Bartonella henselae, usually characterized by self-limiting regional lymphadenopathy and fever. Given the low clinical diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of conventional anti-B. henselae indirect immunofluorescence assays (IFAs), real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based detection of B. henselae is now being proposed as a more sensitive tool to diagnose CSD. Thus, here we have assessed the efficacy of real-time PCR in detecting B. henselae in different specimens from patients with suspected CSD and compared it to that of IFA. From March 2011 to May 2016, at the Microbiology and Virology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Turin, Italy, 115 clinical specimens (56 aspirated pus, 39 fresh lymph node biopsies, and 20 whole blood samples) and 99 sera from 115 patients with suspected CSD (62 females and 53 males between the ages of 3 months and 68 years) were analyzed by both real-time PCR, used in a qualitative way, and IFA (IgM and IgG) for the presence of B. henselae. For 16 patients, serological results were not available due to a clinical decision not to request the test. B. henselae DNA positivity was detected by real-time PCR in 37.39% of patients, while 62.61% of them were negative. Thus, patients were divided into two groups: real-time PCR+ (n = 43) and real-time PCR- (n = 72). Real-time PCR screening of whole blood, biopsies, and aspirated pus revealed B. henselae positivity in 40%, 38.46%, and 35.71% of patients, respectively. When we analyzed samples by IFA, we found the presence of B. henselae in 28 out of 99 (28.28%) patients, of which 11 (11.11%) belonged to the real-time PCR+ group and 17 (17.17%) to the real-time PCR- group. Among the 71 seronegative subjects, 16 (16.16%) were found positive for B. henselae by real-time PCR. Thus, by combining the results of both assays, we were able to increase the percentage of B. henselae positive specimens from 27.27% (real-time PCR) or 28.28% (IFA) to 44.44% (real-time PCR+IFA). Altogether, these findings indicate that the early detection of B. henselae in patients with suspicious CSD through combined real-time PCR and serological analyses can lead to a more accurate diagnosis of CSD, thereby allowing prompt and appropriate disease management.
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.