Evidence Hub

Etiologies of community-onset urinary tract infections requiring hospitalization and antimicrobial susceptibilities of causative microorganisms

Chiu CC, Lin TC, Wu RX, Yang YS, Hsiao PJ, Lee Y, Lin JC, Chang FY

Journal of microbiology, immunology, and infection = Wei mian yu gan ran za zhi, 2017

457 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Community-onset urinary tract infections (CoUTIs) are the most common bacterial infections, and a decline in antibiotic susceptibility causes many clinical challenges. Adequate empiric antibiotic treatment can decrease unnecessary hospital stays and complications, while reducing the antimicrobial resistance progression.

METHODS: From October 2014 to April 2015, we retrospectively enrolled patients who were at least 18 years old and required hospitalization for CoUTIs. Demographic variables of these patients, and uropathogens and their antimicrobial susceptibilities were evaluated.

RESULTS: In total, 457 patients were enrolled in this study. Their mean age was 71.9 years, and 35.2% of the patients were male. Escherichia coli (54.5%) was the most common uropathogen, followed by Klebsiella pneumoniae (13.1%), Enterococcus spp. (7.1%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (4.6%), and Proteus mirabilis (3.5%). Bacteremia was present in 25.2% of patients. Diabetes mellitus and acute kidney injury at admission were risk factors for CoUTIs with concomitant bacteremia. Among the UTI-associated bloodstream strains, E. coli (53.1%) was also the most predominant pathogen, followed by K. pneumoniae (11.3%), Staphylococcus aureus (6.1%), and P. mirabilis (4.3%). The overall susceptibility of cefazolin was 62.8%, ceftriaxone 71.4%, ceftazidime 82.8%, flomoxef 82%, cefepime 94.5%, ampicillin-sulbactam 41.6%, piperacillin-tazobactam 85%, levofloxacin 65.2%, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 61.5%,…

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: 457 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