Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39285460›Full record

ArticleJournal of veterinary internal medicine

Evaluation of the efficacy of a live Escherichia coli biotherapeutic product (asymptomatic bacteriuria E. coli 212).

Gilad Segev, Hilla Chen, Jonathan D Dear, Beatriz Martínez López, Jully Pires, David J Klumpp, Anthony J Schaeffer, Jodi L Westropp

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial, Veterinary
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

8 authors.

Gilad SegevKoret School of Veterinary Medicine, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4714-3159
Hilla ChenKoret School of Veterinary Medicine, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5549-9484
Jonathan D DearDepartment of Medicine and Epidemiology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, Davis, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7166-1442
Beatriz Martínez LópezDepartment of Medicine and Epidemiology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, Davis, California, USA.
Jully PiresVeterinary Center for Clinical Trials, University of California, Davis, Davis, California, USA.
David J KlumppDepartment of Urology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA.
Anthony J SchaefferDepartment of Urology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA.
Jodi L WestroppDepartment of Medicine and Epidemiology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, Davis, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1287-3979

Funding

Morris Animal Foundation D20CA-044
6 · The paper itself

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

Anti-Bacterial AgentsBacteriuriaDog DiseasesEscherichia coliEscherichia coli InfectionsAnimalsDogsFemaleMaleUrinary Tract InfectionsAnti-Bacterial Agentsantimicrobial resistancecystitisdogurinary tract

Identifiers

PMID39285460
PMCPMC11423479

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.