ArticleIranian journal of microbiology2021
Significant bacteriuria among requested repeat urine samples and its clinical correlation.
Article in Iranian journal of microbiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intravesically administered human defensin-5 ameliorates E. coli induced catheter associated-urinary tract infections in female SD rats.Archives of microbiology · 2026Article
- High burden of blaBMC microbiology · 2026Article
- Phenotypic, genotypic characterization and antimicrobial resistance profiling of uropathogenicIranian journal of microbiology · 2025Article
- Bacteriology and clinical outcomes of urine mixed bacterial growth in pregnancy.International urogynecology journal · 2024Article
- A novel approach to screening and managing the urinary tract infections suspected sample in the general human population.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesUrinary tract infections (UTI) are the most common bacterial infections in both outpatient and inpatient department received for routine bacterial culture and sensitivity. We looked for significant bacteriuria in requested repeat urine sample after primary urine culture yielded significant growth (>105 CFU/ml) of ≥3 types of colonies. Also studied, different isolates grown with their sensitivity pattern and contamination rates of urine samples from different departments. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn routine, primary urine cultures yielding ≥3 types of colonies on Cystine Lactose Electrolyte Deficient (C.L.E.D) were requested for repeat samples, collected with aseptic precautions after proper instructions. Data was analyzed for the Microbiological profile and its clinical correlation.
resultsAmong 617 received requested urine samples, 292 (47.3%) yielded significant bacteriuria. Clinical details were available for 252 cases out of which 100 (39.7%) showed asymptomatic bacteriuria, 87 (34.5%) complicated UTI and 65 (25.7%) uncomplicated UTI. Null hypothesis was rejected as 292 (47.3%) of the received repeat samples showed significant bacteriuria and 325 (53%) showed normal flora/no growth i.e. there is a 50% chance of getting either a positive culture or normal flora/no growth in repeat urine samples after the primary urine culture showed ≥3 types of colonies. It indicates the importance of requesting repeat urine samples for an accurate urine culture report. Male patients were significantly associated with significant bacteriuria and complicated UTI (p= 0.001).
conclusionOur study justifies the rationale for asking a repeat urine samples which helps in providing an appropriate microbiological report with antibiotic sensitivity pattern, hence preventing unwanted reporting of commensals/contaminants facilitating evidence based therapy.
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.