ArticleScientific reports2025
Comparison of flow cytometry and heterotrophic plate count methods for dialysis water microbial monitoring.
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.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.