ArticleJournal of veterinary internal medicine
Evaluation of the efficacy of a live Escherichia coli biotherapeutic product (asymptomatic bacteriuria E. coli 212).
Article in Journal of veterinary internal medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evaluation of the efficacy of a live Escherichia coli biotherapeutic product (asymptomatic bacteriuria E. coli 212).Journal of veterinary internal medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRecurrent bacterial cystitis, often referred to as recurrent urinary tract infection (UTI), can be difficult to manage and alternative treatments are needed. HYPOTHESIS/
objectiveIntravesicular administration of asymptomatic bacteriuria (ASB) E. coli 212 will not be inferior to antimicrobial treatment for the management of recurrent UTI in dogs. ANIMALS: Thirty-four dogs with >1 UTI in the 12 months before presentation.
methodsAll dogs were deemed normal otherwise based on absence of abnormalities on physical examination, CBC, serum biochemical panel, and abdominal ultrasonography. Dogs were randomized to 1 of 2 treatment groups: Group 1 antimicrobials for 7 days or group 2 intravesicular administration of ASB E. coli 212. Owners were provided a voiding questionnaire regarding their dogs' clinical signs, which was completed daily for 14 days to assess clinical cure. Dogs were examined on days 7 and 14 to assess clinical cure, and urine specimens were submitted for urinalysis and bacterial culture.
resultsClinical cure rates for ASB E. coli 212-treated dogs were not inferior to 7 days of antimicrobial treatment with a 12% margin of difference to determine non-inferiority. No significant difference was found between the treatment groups on days 7 and 14 in the proportion of dogs achieving ≥50% or ≥75% reduction in their clinical score compared with baseline. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: These data suggest that intravesicular administration of ASB E. coli 212 is not inferior to antimicrobials for the treatment of recurrent UTI in dogs. This biotherapeutic agent could help alleviate the need for antimicrobials for some dogs with recurrent UTI, improving antimicrobial stewardship.
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.