Evidence Hub

Risk factors and prognosis of complicated urinary tract infections caused by Pseudomonas aeruginosa in hospitalized patients: a retrospective multicenter cohort study

A. Gomila, J. Carratalà, N. Eliakim-Raz, E. Shaw, I. Wiegand, L. Vallejo-Torres, A. Gorostiza, J. Vigo et al.

Infection and Drug Resistance, 2018

37 citations

Abstract

Purpose Complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs) are among the most frequent health-care-associated infections. In patients with cUTI, Pseudomonas aeruginosa deserves special attention, since it can affect patients with serious underlying conditions. Our aim was to gain insight into the risk factors and prognosis of P. aeruginosa cUTIs in a scenario of increasing multidrug resistance (MDR). Methods This was a multinational, retrospective, observational study at 20 hospitals in south and southeastern Europe, Turkey, and Israel including consecutive patients with cUTI hospitalized between January 2013 and December 2014. A mixed-effect logistic regression model was performed to assess risk factors for P. aeruginosa and MDR P. aeruginosa cUTI. Results Of 1,007 episodes of cUTI, 97 (9.6%) were due to P. aeruginosa. Resistance rates of P. aeruginosa were: antipseudomonal cephalosporins 35 of 97 (36.1%), aminoglycosides 30 of 97 (30.9%), piperacillin–tazobactam 21 of 97 (21.6%), fluoroquinolones 43 of 97 (44.3%), and carbapenems 28 of 97 (28.8%). The MDR rate was 28 of 97 (28.8%). Independent risk factors for P. aeruginosa cUTI were male sex (OR 2.61, 95% CI 1.60–4.27), steroid therapy (OR 2.40, 95% CI 1.10–5.27), bedridden functional status (OR 1.79, 95% CI 0.99–3.25), antibiotic treatment within the previous 30 days (OR 2.34, 95% CI 1.38–3.94), indwelling urinary catheter (OR 2.41, 95% CI 1.43–4.08), and procedures that anatomically modified the urinary tract (OR 2.01, 95% CI…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, 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