Evidence Hub

Urinary tract infection in urolithiasis patients: risk factor analysis, pathogen distribution, and antimicrobial resistance characteristics

Yan L, He Z, Wang T, Li Q, Liu D

Frontiers in public health, 2026

934 participants

Abstract

Objective: This study investigated risk factors, pathogen distribution, and antimicrobial resistance characteristics of urinary tract infection (UTI) in patients with urolithiasis.

Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted among 934 patients with urolithiasis treated between April 2020 and April 2025. Patients were classified into a UTI group (n = 194) and a non-UTI group (n = 740). Clinical variables, stone-related characteristics, urinary parameters, renal function indicators, urine culture results, and antimicrobial susceptibility data were analyzed. Univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression were used to identify independent risk factors for UTI.

Results: Among 178 non-duplicate pathogenic isolates from the UTI group, Gram-negative bacteria predominated (68.54%), followed by Gram-positive bacteria (27.53%) and fungi (3.93%). Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa were the most common Gram-negative pathogens, while Enterococcus faecalis and Enterococcus faecium were the main Gram-positive pathogens. Escherichia coli showed high resistance to ampicillin, cefazolin, and ceftazidime, whereas no imipenem-resistant Escherichia coli or Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates were detected. Multivariate logistic regression identified hydronephrosis, urinary tract obstruction, urine pH ≥ 7.0, stone diameter ≥3 mm, and serum creatinine ≥106 μmol/L as independent risk factors for UTI.

Conclusion: Urolithiasis-associated UTI is mainly caused by Gram-negative…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 934 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free