Evidence Hub

Antimicrobial susceptibility of microorganisms that cause urinary tract infections in pediatric patients

Rodríguez-Lozano J, de Malet A, Cano ME, de la Rubia L, Wallmann R, Martínez-Martínez L, Calvo J

Enfermedades infecciosas y microbiologia clinica (English ed.), 2018

7,924 participants

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Cumulative susceptibility reports are a valuable tool for the empirical treatment of urinary tract infections, especially in the current context of increasing resistance rates. Our objective was to analyze the antimicrobial susceptibility of bacterial isolates in urine cultures of pediatric patients during a five-year period.

METHODS: Retrospective study of urine cultures from 2011 to 2015. Identification and antimicrobial susceptibility tests were performed using the Vitek-2 system (BioMérieux®) and categorized according to EUCAST criteria. Antimicrobial susceptibility data were analyzed by gender and age groups (neonates, 1 month to 5 years, 5-15 years) before being compared with data obtained from patients over the age of 15 years.

RESULTS: During the study period, 17164 urine cultures were processed from 7924 patients under 16 years of age. Antimicrobial susceptibility rates in these patients were: ampicillin 36.3%, amoxicillin/clavulanic acid 75.3%, cefuroxime 83.2%, co-trimoxazole 68.9%, ciprofloxacin 85.3%, fosfomycin 85.5%, nitrofurantoin 84.4% and 3rd generation cephalosporins 89-91%. Aminoglycosides (>92%) and carbapenems (95%) maintained the highest susceptibility rates. The prevalence of ESBL-producing isolates was significantly lower in children under the age of 16 years (1.5% vs. 4.1%). In patients under the age of 16 years, Escherichia coli isolates in girls were significantly more sensitive (p<0.0001) to ampicillin (41% vs. 30%) and…

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. Reported size: 7,924 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