| Title |
Urinary symptoms are associated with certain urinary microbes in urogynecologic surgical patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00192-018-3732-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Cynthia S. Fok, Xiang Gao, Huaiying Lin, Krystal J. Thomas-White, Elizabeth R. Mueller, Alan J. Wolfe, Qunfeng Dong, Linda Brubaker |
| Abstract |
Persistent and de novo symptoms decrease satisfaction after urogynecologic surgery. We investigated whether the preoperative bladder microbiome is associated with urinary symptoms prior to and after urogynecologic surgery. One hundred twenty-six participants contributed responses to the validated OABq symptom questionnaire. Catheterized (bladder) urine samples and vaginal and perineal swabs were collected immediately preoperatively. Bacterial DNA in the urine samples and swabs was sequenced and classified. Preoperative symptom severity was significantly worse in sequence-positive patients. Higher OABq Symptom Severity (OABqSS) scores (more symptomatic) were associated with higher abundance in bladder urine of two bacterial species: Atopobium vaginae and Finegoldia magna. The presence of Atopobium vaginae in bladder urine also was correlated with its presence in either the vagina or perineum. Two specific bacterial species detected in bladder urine, Atopobium vaginae and Finegoldia magna, are associated with preoperative urinary symptom severity in women undergoing POP/SUI surgery. The reservoir for Atopobium vaginae may be adjacent pelvic floor niches. This observation should be validated in a larger cohort to determine whether there is a microbiologic etiology for certain preoperative urinary symptoms. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 21% |
| United States | 2 | 11% |
| India | 1 | 5% |
| Australia | 1 | 5% |
| Belgium | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 10 | 53% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 58% |
| Scientists | 5 | 26% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 11% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 52 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 21% |
| Researcher | 9 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 12% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Unknown | 9 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 33% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 10% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 5 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 8% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 11 | 21% |
| Unknown | 8 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 April 2019.
All research outputs
#1,908,911
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction
#105
of 2,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,902
of 324,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction
#4
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,900 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 324,991 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.