Evidence Hub

"Uropathogens and antimicrobial susceptibility patterns in urosepsis patients at kafr el sheikh University hospital: a cross-sectional study"

El Nahal ASM, Ibrahim A, Abdelhalim E, Mohamed SAS, Saadoun MM, Hamdy M, Abdelmonsef HA, Zeinelabden KM et al.

Scientific reports, 2026

168 participants

Abstract

Urosepsis is a life-threatening consequence of urinary tract infections, often linked to obstruction, indwelling devices, and healthcare exposure. Increasing antimicrobial resistance among uropathogens complicates empirical therapy and adversely affects outcomes, making local surveillance essential for appropriate management. To determine the bacterial profile and antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of urosepsis cases admitted to Kafr El-Sheikh University Hospital. This cross-sectional study included 168 patients with confirmed urosepsis admitted to the Urology Unit between February 2024 and October 2025. Urosepsis was defined by identical organisms in urine and blood cultures with systemic sepsis and a SOFA score of ≥ 2. Cultures were processed using standard microbiological methods, with identification confirmed by biochemical testing and ATR-FTIR. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed using the Kirby-Bauer method according to CLSI 2024 and verified by the BD Phoenix™ system. Multidrug-resistant (MDR) and ESBL-producing organisms were identified using standard criteria. The mean age of the patients was 56.2 ± 15.6 years, and 70.8% were male. Catheter-associated infections were identified in all cases (100%), reflecting the healthcare-associated nature of this cohort, while renal abscesses were detected in 26.2%. Gram-negative organisms predominated (90.5%), with Escherichia coli being the most frequently isolated pathogen. Statistical analysis revealed no…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cross-sectional, done in people. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause. Reported size: 168 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