ArticleJournal of veterinary internal medicine2026
Veterinary blood culture diagnostic testing: methodology and results from a German single-center study on dogs (2014-2022).
Article in Journal of veterinary internal medicine, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBlood cultures (BCs) are the gold standard for identifying bacterial bloodstream infections and are vital for directing antimicrobial treatment. HYPOTHESIS/
objectivesCharacterize BC results and diagnostic testing in veterinary medicine. Pathogen identification (ID) results, antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) results, and management factors were investigated to identify optimization opportunities. ANIMALS: A total of 750 BCs from 687 dogs presented between January 2014 and September 2022 at a German teaching hospital, with 102 positive BCs from 101 dogs.
methodsRetrospective analysis of historical data. A BC system suitable for aerobic and anaerobic pathogens was used.
resultsBlood culture yield (clinically relevant growth in 102/750 BCs) was 13.6%, and the contamination rate was 1.9%. Commonly isolated pathogens were Enterobacterales (n = 15/25 multidrug-resistant), coagulase-positive staphylococci (n = 3/23 methicillin-resistant), beta-hemolytic streptococci (n = 19), and obligate anaerobes (n = 22). Polymicrobial growth occurred in 8 BCs (7.8%). Median duration of the preanalytical phase (sampling until receipt in laboratory) was 1 day (interquartile range [IQR], 1-2), from receipt in laboratory until ID results 1 day (IQR, 1-2), and until AST results 2 days (IQR, 2-4). The preanalytical phase of BCs taken on weekends was a median of 1 day longer (P < .001). Dogs treated with antimicrobials within 7 days before sampling were 10.74 times more likely to yield a multidrug-resistant isolate (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.62-31.86). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: Improving BC processing requires addressing the management factors BC yield, contamination rate, weekend sampling, and antimicrobial pretreatment. Detection of resistant bacteria emphasizes the need for more rapid processing to shorten the time to optimized antimicrobial treatment.
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.