ArticleIranian journal of microbiology2022
Isolation of obligate anaerobes from clinical samples received for routine bacterial culture and sensitivity: a cross sectional study.
Article in Iranian journal of microbiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Decoding anaerobes: a comprehensive evaluation of MALDI-TOF Sirius and VITEK MS PRIME in clinical settings.Microbiology spectrum · 2025Article
- Bacteremia Caused by Clostridium symbiosum in University Clinical Hospital Mostar: A Case Report.Cureus · 2024Article
- Genetic and phenotypic ofIranian journal of microbiology · 2024Article
- Phenotypic and genotypic identification of carbapenem resistance in Bacteroides fragilis clinical strains.Medical microbiology and immunology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Obligate anaerobic bacteria are known to cause various infections in human beings. We aimed to determine the prevalence and spectrum of obligate anaerobes encountered in pus aspirate, sterile fluids and tissue samples received for routine bacterial culture and sensitivity. Materials and Methods: A total of 160 samples including tissue, sterile body fluids and pus aspirate were collected, analysed for prevalence and spectrum of obligate anaerobes. Identification of obligate and facultative anaerobes was done by automated MALDI-TOF and Vitek 2 method. Results: Among 160 samples, 75 samples (46.8%) yielded obligate anaerobes out of which 41 samples (26%) yielded obligate anaerobes along with facultative anaerobes which was significant (p value=0.031) and 34 samples (21%) yielded only obligate anaerobes. 90 obligate anaerobes were isolated from 75 samples among which only 34 (37.7%) samples yielded only obligate anaerobes and 56 (62.2%) yielded both obligate and facultative anaerobes. Gram stain with polymicrobial appearance (p value 0.02) was found to be significantly associated with growth of obligate anaerobes. Clinical conditions where obligate anaerobes were commonly associated were appendicular abscess, empyema, fournier's gangrene, diabetic foot, ludwigs angina and deep abscess. Out of 75 positive samples 30 (40%) patients had predisposing conditions like diabetes mellitus, hypertension etc. Total of 90 obligate anaerobes and 49 facultative anaerobes were isolated. The common obligate anaerobes were Conclusion: There was significant isolation of obligate anaerobes along with facultative anaerobes in clinical samples received for aerobic culture and sensitivity. There is a need for isolation of these bacteria routinely and a scope for doing antibiotic susceptibility testing, which will help in evidence-based medicine and a better clinical outcome by giving appropriate 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.