Evidence Hub

Circumcision and Risk of Febrile Urinary Tract Infection in Boys with Posterior Urethral Valves: Result of the CIRCUP Randomized Trial

L. Harper, T. Blanc, M. Peycelon, J. Michel, M. Leclair, S. Garnier, V. Flaum, A. Arnaud et al.

European Urology, 2021

91 participants · 52 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Boys with posterior urethral valves (PUVs) have an increased risk of febrile urinary tract infections (fUTIs). Circumcision is believed to reduce the risk of fUTIs in boys, although there are no randomized trials demonstrating this.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of circumcision on the risk of fUTIs in boys with PUVs.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A clinical randomized trial that ran between August 2012 and July 2017 was conducted. The trial was multicentric, including 13 referral centers for pediatric urology. Male boys, aged 1-28 d, diagnosed with posterior urethral valves, confirmed by voiding cystogram, were included. The exclusion criteria included presence of a genital malformation contraindicating performing a circumcision.

INTERVENTION

Participants were randomized to neonatal circumcision + antibiotic prophylaxis (CATB) or antibiotic prophylaxis alone (ATB), and followed for 2 yr.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary outcome was a risk of presenting fUTIs in each group. An fUTI was defined as fever (>38.5 °C) with evidence of pyuria and culture-proven infection on urinalysis, obtained by urethral catheterization or suprapubic aspiration. A bivariate analysis of the primary outcome was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

In total, 91 patients were included: 49 in group CATB and 42 in group ATB. The probability of presenting an fUTI was 20% in group ATB versus 3% in group CATB. The hazard ratio of…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 91 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