Evidence Hub

Antimicrobial susceptibilities of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae in health care-associated urinary tract infection: focus on susceptibility to fosfomycin

Cho YH, Jung SI, Chung HS, Yu HS, Hwang EC, Kim SO, Kang TW, Kwon DD et al.

International urology and nephrology, 2015

Abstract

PURPOSE: The appearance of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing gram-negative bacteria in urinary tract infection (UTI) constitutes an important therapeutic challenge. The aim of this study was to describe drug susceptibility profiles of ESBL-producing bacteria isolated from urine samples. We also determined the antimicrobial co-resistance to several agents, including fosfomycin.

METHODS: The computerized database was used to identify ESBL-positive urine samples. We analyzed E. coli and Klebsiella isolates obtained from urine cultures, and duplicate isolates and isolates not tested against fosfomycin were excluded. The cases were further categorized according to UTI definition [community-acquired (CoA) UTI, community-onset health care-associated (HCA) UTI, and hospital-acquired (HA) UTI]. ESBL isolates were stratified according to their origin into two groups: urology and non-urology isolates.

RESULTS: Antimicrobial susceptibilities of the strains to fosfomycin were tested in 277 ESBL-positive strains, 217 ESBL-EC strains, and 60 ESBL-KP strains. The most effective agents were carbapenems, such as imipenem and meropenem. The least active substances were ciprofloxacin (20.7 %), levofloxacin (22.7 %), trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (34.3 %), and ampicillin-clavulanate (42.9 %). Overall, 243 out of the 277 (87.7 %) isolates tested were susceptible to fosfomycin. Higher fosfomycin sensitivity was observed in E. coli (94.9 %) compared to Klebsiella (61.7 %) (p =…

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.

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