Evidence Hub

Characteristics and outcomes of urinary tract infections caused by Enterococci: A multicenter retrospective study from two tertiary hospitals in Saudi Arabia

Khaled F. Alharthi, Salem M. Baotab, Abdullah M. Bankhar, Atheer A. Alsehli, Israa A. Idris, Manar S. Badwood, Waad K. Alharbi, M. M. Almatrafi et al.

Journal of Infection and Chemotherapy, 2024

396 participants · 3 citations

Abstract

Enterococci are Gram-positive coccus bacteria that are normally present in the gastrointestinal tract and ordinarily function commensally with humans. Very few studies have investigated the characteristics of enterococcal infections. We aimed to characterize patients with urinary tract infections (UTIs) due to Enterococci and their outcomes. This was a retrospective cohort study between June 2012-November 2022. Patients who had clinically and microbiologically confirmed Enterococcal UTI based on a urine culture positive for E. faecalis or E. faecium with a count of ≥ 105 CFU/mL and having urinary tract symptoms were included. A total of 396 patients were eligible and included. The patients had a median age of 61 years and were mostly females (56.8%). The most common characteristics were hospitalization in a non-ICU ward, having a urinary catheter, and recent use of antibiotics within the last 3 months (66.4%, 59.3%, and 51.8%, respectively). Infection with E. faecalis was more common than E. faecium (77.3% vs. 22.7%). However, the latter exhibited higher rates of antibiotic resistance (P<0.001 to several antibiotics) and was associated with significantly higher median C-reactive protein level (26.7 vs. 13 mg/dL; P=0.025), mortality (23% vs. 10.1%; P=0.002), and median length of stay (25 vs. 11.5 days; P<0.001). We found that most patients with enterococcal UTIs had a history of having a urinary catheter and recent antibiotic use and were mostly females and hospitalized in…

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: 396 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