Evidence Hub

The Global Prevalence of Class 1 Integron and Associated Antibiotic Resistance in Escherichia coli from Patients with Urinary Tract Infections, a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

M. Halaji, A. Feizi, A. Mirzaei, Hadi Sedigh Ebrahim-Saraie, Amirhossein Fayyazi, A. Ashraf, S. A. Havaei

Microbial Drug Resistance, 2020

19 participants · 30 citations

Abstract

Objectives: The present systematic review and meta-analysis study aimed to investigate the prevalence of class 1 integrons and their associated antibiotic resistance in uropathogenic Escherichia coli. Materials and Methods: A systematic search was conducted to identify studies meeting our inclusion criteria in the Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar electronic databases to the end of July 2019. Finally, 35 articles were selected for data extraction, and meta-analysis was performed using the metaprop program in the STATA, version 11.0, software. Results: The pooled prevalence of class 1 integrons was 47% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 40–54), ranging from 6% to 90%. There was significant heterogeneity among the 35 studies (χ2 = 840.37; p < 0.001; I2 = 95.95%). The results of the subgroup analysis based on characterization of patients indicated that pooled prevalence of class 1 integrons was 52% (95% CI: 41–63; n = 14 studies) and 43% (95% CI: 34–54; n = 19 studies) in hospitalized and community patients, respectively. The lowest and highest prevalence of antibiotic resistance was observed for imipenem and ampicillin, respectively. According to the results of Begg's and Egger's tests, we did not find significant publication bias both in the included studies and in the subgroup analysis. Conclusions: The results show the high prevalence of class 1 integrons and high level of antibiotic resistance in association with those among uropathogenic E. coli.…

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: 19 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