Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34463359›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of small animal practice2021

Results of urinary bacterial cultures and antibiotic susceptibility testing of dogs and cats in the UK.

J D Fonseca, D E Mavrides, P A Graham, T D McHugh

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of small animal practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Guideline
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. A One Health Perspective onMicroorganisms · 2026
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Zoonotic Risks ofMicroorganisms · 2025
    Review
  11. UropathogenicMicroorganisms · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. The Antimicrobial Effect ofPharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Antimicrobial Resistance inAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

J D FonsecaCentre for Clinical Microbiology, University College London, Royal Free Campus, London, NW3 2QG, UK.
D E MavridesDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge, Madingley Road, Cambridge, CB3 0ES, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1249-9561
P A GrahamSchool of Veterinary Medicine and Science, University of Nottingham, Sutton Bonington, LE12 5RD, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7133-1358
T D McHughCentre for Clinical Microbiology, University College London, Royal Free Campus, London, NW3 2QG, UK.
The Royal Free Hospital · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GBUniversity of Nottingham · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesBacterial urinary tract infections are a common diagnosis in small animal practice and antibiotics are often administered empirically. The aim of this study was to investigate the aetiology and antibiotic resistance of uropathogens in dogs and cats in the UK. MATERIALS AND

methodsRetrospective study of uroculture and antibiotic susceptibility testing results (n=808) by disk diffusion processed at a veterinary pathology laboratory between 2011 and 2012.

resultsSignificant bacteriuria was detected in 18.4% of samples from dogs and 10.0% from cats, most of which (>90%) yielded a single organism. Escherichia coli was the most prevalent bacterial species (54.7% and 55.6% of feline and canine isolates, respectively) followed by Proteus mirabilis in dog samples (22.7%) and Enterococcus spp. in cat samples (23.2%). Approximately a third of E. coli isolates were resistant to ampicillin but resistance was much lower among Enterococcus spp. and P. mirabilis. Resistance to amoxicillin-clavulanic acid also seemed to be emerging, particularly in E. coli (almost 20% resistant). In contrast, resistance to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole for uropathogens remained <13% except for P. mirabilis (19.4%). Overall, fluoroquinolones showed the best in vitro activity (resistance mostly below 10% for enrofloxacin and marbofloxacin). CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Our results provide evidence of the emergence of resistance to antibiotics commonly used to treat bacterial urinary tract infections. Continued monitoring of the patterns of antibiotic resistance in uropathogens is needed to assess the adequacy of recommendations on the empiric therapy of these infections.

Indexed as

Cat DiseasesDog DiseasesUrinary Tract InfectionsAnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsCatsDogsDrug Resistance, BacterialEscherichia coliFemaleMaleMicrobial Sensitivity TestsRetrospective StudiesUnited KingdomAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID34463359
PMCPMC9292356
OpenAlexW3198086177

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.