Evidence Hub

Antibiotic practices in kidney transplant recipients with urosepsis are associated with treatment outcomes - a post-hoc analysis of an observational study

Królicki T, Kudla T, Królicka A, Bardowska K, Letachowicz K, Gawda R, Czarnik T, Krajewska M et al.

European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2025

Abstract

This study is a post-hoc analysis of a previously published observational study. The aim is to characterize the epidemiology, etiology and antibiotic practices in KTRs admitted due to urosepsis (US) and urinary tract infection (UTI) to a tertiary transplantation center between the period 2014-2019.The two study groups consisted of 101 KTRs with a primary episode of US and 100 randomly selected KTRs hospitalized for UTI as a control group. A post-hoc analysis of clinical and microbiological data was performed, and a local microbiological map was created.The estimated yearly incidence of US in the study population was 21.1 (95% CI: 15.3-26.9) cases per 1000 KTRs per year. Urosepsis accounted for 85% of all sepsis cases. The most common causative pathogen in both groups was Escherichia coli. In 46% and 11% of US and UTI cases, initial empiric antibiotic therapy had to be escalated until day 3 due to lack of clinical response or proven bacterial resistance. This delay in appropriate antibiotic treatment in the US group was significantly associated with mortality (OR = 10.1 with p = 0.021), need for acute renal replacement therapy (OR = 4.73 with p = 0.012) and non-recovery from AKI (OR = 3.18 with p = 0.031). After discharge from hospital, almost 60% of all study subjects received a prophylactic antibiotic course for prevention of UTI recurrence, which did not translate into a lower frequency of readmission due to UTI in a multivariable analysis.US is a common insult that…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, 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.

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