Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40229402›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Comparison of flow cytometry and heterotrophic plate count methods for dialysis water microbial monitoring.

Rui Lucena, Juliane Feurle, Célia Gil, Aníbal Ferreira, Pedro Ponce, Bernard Canaud

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Rui LucenaFresenius Medical Care Deutschland GmbH, Bad Homburg, Germany. rui.lucena@freseniusmedicalcare.com.
Juliane FeurleFresenius Medical Care Deutschland GmbH, Bad Homburg, Germany.
Célia GilUnidade Local de Saúde Lisboa Ocidental, Hospital Santa Cruz (Nephrology Department); Medical Director Nephrocare Alverca Dialysis Clinic, Portugal, NephroCare Alverca, Lisbon, Portugal.
Aníbal FerreiraNova Medical School Lisboa, Nephrology Department of Hospital Curry Cabral - ULS São José, NephroCare Carregado, Lisbon, Portugal.
Pedro PonceCountry Medical Director NephroCare Portugal, Lisbon, Portugal.
Bernard CanaudNephrology Department, School of Medicine, and Foundation Ch. Mion, Montpellier University, AIDER-Santé, Montpellier, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Water is an essential component of renal replacement therapy by dialysis. Haemodialysis patients undergoing 4-hour dialysis sessions, thrice weekly, may be exposed to more than 360 L of dialysis fluid per week. Dialysis water and ultrapure dialysis fluids have been established as a prerequisite for online convective therapies (namely haemodiafiltration), to improve biocompatibility of the dialysis system and to reduce inflammation profile of the dialysis patients. The microbial quality of dialysis water should be monitored regularly to demonstrate the effectiveness of the disinfection protocol. Current water and dialysis fluids microbial quality assessment is typically done via heterotrophic plate counts (HPC) and endotoxins analysis. Plate counts methodology provides information on the microbial content of the water only after a considerable incubation time (typically 7 days). Flow cytometry (FCM), as a rapid alternative method, provides the possibility of real-time corrective actions and greater patient safety. In this study, we compared the outcomes of dialysis water microbial quality in an existing dialysis clinic, using two different measurement methods, HPC and FCM, to test the possible benefits of applying FCM as a valid alternative method for dialysis water microbial monitoring. We conclude that FCM offers higher sensitivity than HPC for microbial monitoring of dialysis water, potentially enabling earlier corrective actions. More extensive and larger studies are needed, namely, to evaluate the possible added value of FCM method in dialysis fluids monitoring. If the FCM method is confirmed, it will be necessary to establish maximum allowable levels and typical action levels for dialysis water and dialysis fluids quality when using FCM.

Indexed as

Dialysis SolutionsFlow CytometryRenal DialysisWater MicrobiologyColony Count, MicrobialHumansDialysis SolutionsDialysis waterFlow cytometryHaemodialysisHeterotrophic plate countMicrobiological monitoringWater microbiology

Identifiers

PMID40229402
PMCPMC11997118

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.