Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41745920›Full record

ReviewVeterinary sciences2026

A Systematic Review of Bacterial Sampling Collection for Veterinary Microbiology in Companion Animals.

Inês C Rodrigues, Joana C Prata, Ângela Pista, Paulo Martins da Costa

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Veterinary sciences, 2026. 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

4 authors.

Inês C RodriguesSchool of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University of Porto (ICBAS-UP), Rua de Jorge Viterbo Ferreira, 228, 4050-313 Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0003-1248-3452
Joana C Pratai4HB-Institute for Health and Bioeconomy, University Institute of Health Sciences (CESPU), 4585-116 Gandra, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-7814-3659
Ângela PistaNational Reference Laboratory for Gastrointestinal Infections, Department of Infectious Diseases, National Institute of Health Doutor Ricardo Jorge, Avenue Padre Cruz, 1649-016 Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-9219-4222
Paulo Martins da CostaSchool of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University of Porto (ICBAS-UP), Rua de Jorge Viterbo Ferreira, 228, 4050-313 Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-6115-8811

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate microbiological diagnosis in companion animals relies heavily on appropriate sample collection, handling, storage, and transport. This systematic review, conducted according to the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, aimed to assess current microbiological sampling procedures used in dogs and cats, from specimen collection to laboratory submission. Seventeen studies published in English over the past decade met the inclusion criteria. Considerable variability in sampling practices was observed across different anatomical systems. Although swabs were the most frequently employed sampling method, their use is limited by reduced representativeness and an increased risk of contamination, whereas tissue biopsies and aspirates provide more reliable diagnostic results. Sampling practices were generally more consistent for urine samples; however, pre-laboratory factors, such as prior antimicrobial exposure, as well as transport and storage conditions, were inconsistently reported, hindering reproducibility and standardisation. The anatomical site sampled and the suspected pathogen determined whether aerobic or combined aerobic-anaerobic cultures were recommended. Overall, the findings reveal considerable methodological gaps and underscore the need for harmonised, evidence-based guidelines to support accurate and clinically relevant bacterial culture in veterinary diagnostics. Standardised protocols, developed collaboratively by clinicians and diagnostic laboratories, have the potential to improve diagnostic consistency, strengthen antimicrobial stewardship, enhance surveillance, and ultimately benefit clinical outcomes within One Health initiatives.

Indexed as

bacterial culturecompanion animalsmicrobiological samplingsample handling and transport

Identifiers

PMID41745920
PMCPMC12944951

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.