ArticleMicrobiology spectrum2025
Urine PCR testing as an effective method for early diagnosis of leptospirosis.
Article in Microbiology spectrum, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Postflood Leptospirosis Outbreak Response Due toOpen forum infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Early diagnosis and treatment of leptospirosis: Optimizing clinical outcomes.The Journal of infection · 2026Review
- Laboratory Diagnosis of Leptospirosis.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The role of urine PCR for leptospirosis diagnosis in the first week is controversial due to assumed limited urine excretion. This study analyzed the prescribing practices and sensitivity of blood and urine Leptospira PCR, particularly in early stages of infection. A study was conducted on adult patients diagnosed with leptospirosis in French Guiana between 2016 and 2022 by positive Leptospira PCR, or titer of Micro-Agglutination Test > 1/200, or positive IgM with no alternative diagnosis. The timing of PCR tests and their sensitivity were analyzed. A multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify the factors associated with the sensitivity and predict the probability of having a positive result. Among 188 analyzed patients, 137 (73%) and 61 (32%) underwent blood and urine PCR tests with a median (IQR) delay since symptoms onset of 5 (3-7) and 6 (5-8) days, respectively. The overall sensitivity of urine PCR was 84% (vs 70% for blood PCR, IMPORTANCE: The study investigates the utility of urinary PCR for diagnosing leptospirosis, focusing on its early sensitivity. Conducted in French Guiana between 2016 and 2022, the research analyzed prescribing practices and the sensitivity of blood and urine PCR tests in adult patients. Results indicated that while underutilized, urinary PCR demonstrated high sensitivity from the early days of symptom onset, achieving 84% sensitivity compared to 70% for blood PCR. The sensitivity of blood PCR decreased over time, whereas that of urinary PCR remained stable. The study advocates for the routine inclusion of urinary PCR in the diagnostic workup from the first week of illness to enhance early leptospirosis detection.
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.