Evidence Hub

Bacterial pathogens, resistance patterns and treatment options in community acquired pediatric urinary tract infection

Pape L, Gunzer F, Ziesing S, Pape A, Offner G, Ehrich JH

Klinische Padiatrie, 2004

100 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Epidemiology and resistance patterns of bacterial pathogens in pediatric UTI show large interregional variability and rates of bacterial resistances are changing due to different antibiotic treatment. We intended to evaluate data from northern Germany.

PATIENTS AND METHODS: In 100 children (53 female, 47 male, mean age 4.4 +/- 4.2 years) with community acquired UTI, who presented in the emergency department of our medical school from 2000 - 2002, urine cultures were performed. Inclusion criteria were: acute voiding symptoms, significant bacteriuria with growth of at least 10 (5) colony-forming units/ml urine, leukocyturia > 50/ micro l. Exclusion criteria were underlying renal diseases, anatomic abnormalities of the urinary tract, age < 2 months and recurrent UTI.

RESULTS: Patients presented with a mean rectal temperature of 38.6 +/- 1.3 degrees C, mean CRP of 66 +/- 68 mg/dl, mean WBC 13 500 +/- 5 600/ micro l and mean urinary leukocytes of 425 +/- 363/ micro l. In urine cultures E. coli was found in 47 % of the cases, Enterococcus faecalis 23 %, Proteus mirabilis 8 %, Klebsiella oxytoca 4 %, Pseudomonas aeruginosa 5 % and others 13 %. In 76 % one and in 24 % two different bacterial species (60 % Enterococcus faecalis) were cultured. Mean resistance rates were in all bacteria (in E. coli): Ampicillin 53 % (69 %), Ampicillin and Sulbactam 51 % (61 %), Cefalosporin 1 (st) generation (Cefaclor) 48 % (24 %), Cefalosporin 2 (nd) generation (Cefuroxim) 40 % (3 %),…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cross-sectional, done in people. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause. Reported size: 100 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