Evidence Hub

D-mannose vs other agents for recurrent urinary tract infection prevention in adult women: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Lenger SM, Bradley MS, Thomas DA, Bertolet MH, Lowder JL, Sutcliffe S

American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2020

163 participants · 121 citations

Abstract

Objective: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine whether D-mannose reduces urinary tract infection recurrence (ie, cumulative incidence) in adult women with recurrent urinary tract infection compared with other prevention agents. Secondary outcomes included side effects and compliance with D-mannose use.

Data sources: Ovid Medline 1946-, Embase 1947-, Scopus 1823-, Cochrane Library, Web of Science 1900-, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched through 4/15/2020.

Study eligibility criteria: Systematic review inclusion: randomized controlled trials, prospective cohorts, and retrospective cohorts written in English of women ≥18 years old with recurrent urinary tract infection in which D-mannose was utilized as an outpatient prevention regimen. Systematic review exclusion: lab or animal-based research, study protocols only, and conference abstracts. Meta-analysis inclusion: stated D-mannose dose, follow-up time ≥6 months, a comparison arm to D-mannose, and data available from women ≥18 years of age.

Study appraisal and synthesis methods: Two independent reviewers made abstract, full text, and data extraction decisions. Study methodologic quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Relative risks, confidence intervals, and heterogeneity were computed.

Results: Searches identified 776 unique citations. Eight publications met eligibility: 2 using D-mannose only; 6 using D-mannose combined with another treatment. Seven studies were prospective:…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 163 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