Evidence Hub

Seven versus Fourteen Days of Antibiotics for Gram-Negative Bacteremia from a Urinary Tract Source: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Luna G, Rodriguez A, Igbonagwam C, Barakat Z, Carralero-Somoza D, Khan Z, Snyder G, Soliman M et al.

Infectious diseases and therapy, 2026

4,448 participants · 2 citations

Abstract

Introduction: The optimal duration of antibiotic therapy for Gram-negative bacteremia sourced from urinary tract infections (UTI) remains uncertain. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing short-course (approximately 7 days) versus prolonged-course (approximately 14 days) antibiotic therapy in this population.

Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov through 26 April 26 2025. Studies were included if they compared 7-day versus 14-day antibiotic therapy in Gram-negative bacteremia with ≥ 65% UTI source or performed a dedicated UTI subgroup analysis. Outcomes assessed included 30- and 90-day mortality and recurrence rates. Recurrence was defined as a repeat episode of Gram-negative bacteremia confirmed by a positive blood culture after completion of therapy, rather than recurrence of urinary tract infection alone. Risk ratios (RR) were pooled using a random-effects model. Noninferiority was assessed using a prespecified margin of RR 1.25, and superiority was assessed with a threshold of RR < 1.00.

Results: In total, six studies (three randomized trials, three observational cohorts) encompassing 4448 patients were included. There were no significant differences between short- and prolonged-course therapy for 30-day mortality (RR 0.97, 95% confident interval (CI) 0.64-1.47; p = 0.90), 30-day recurrence (RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.80-2.37; p = 0.24), 90-day mortality (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.77-1.06; p = 0.20), or 90-day recurrence (RR…

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: 4,448 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