Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11869659›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2002

Methenamine hippurate for preventing urinary tract infections.

B Lee, T Bhuta, J Craig, J Simpson

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Methenamine hippurate for preventing urinary tract infections.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. UTIs in patients with neurogenic bladder.Current urology reports · 2014
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. [Single-use intermittent catheterisation].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2006
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Urinary tract infections in adult general practice patients.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2002
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

B LeeRoyal North Shore Hospital, Spinal Unit, P.O Box 431, Broadway, Sydney, NSW, Australia, 2007. blee@medicalinformatics.net
T Bhuta
J Craig
J Simpson
North Shore Hospital · NZRoyal North Shore Hospital · AUThe University of Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMethenamine salts are often used for the prevention of urinary tract infection (UTI).

objectivesTo assess the effectiveness of methenamine hippurate in preventing UTI. SEARCH STRATEGY: Published and unpublished randomised controlled trials were identified from the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Current Contents, reference lists of review articles and retrieved trials. The manufacturers' of methenamine salts were contacted for unpublished studies and contact was made with known investigators in the area. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials of methenamine hippurate used for the prevention of UTIs in all population groups were eligible for inclusion. A comparison with a control (no treatment) group was a prerequisite to selection. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers (BL and TB) performed independent assessment and data extraction using a standardised format. Discrepancies, methodological and interpretative issues were discussed with JS or JC. An exploration of heterogeneity as well as a detailed description of results grouped by population was conducted. MAIN

resultsEleven studies met the inclusion criteria. All trials were included in a descriptive analysis. Seven trials were included in meta-analyses. Four trials (199 patients) studied symptomatic bacteriuria and six trials (341 patients) studied bacteriuria as an outcome measure. Overall, trial quality was poor. The direction of six of the pooled trials was towards a favourable treatment effect from methenamine hippurate. Interpretation of the pooled estimates was not done in view of underlying heterogeneity. The study by Pettersson 1989 explained some, but not all, of the underlying heterogeneity. This study differed from all others by including patients with known upper renal tract abnormalities. Adverse reactions were mentioned by 10 studies. The rate of adverse events was low. REVIEWER'S

conclusionsThere is not enough evidence to conclusively support the use of methenamine hippurate for urinary prophylaxis. An exploration of heterogeneity raises the (hypothesis generating) possibility that methenamine hippurate may have some efficacy in patients without but not in patients with known upper renal tract abnormality (with asymptomatic bacteriuria as the outcome measure). Due to the small sample size and methodological problems within the studies involved, interpretation of these data should be done cautiously. The rate of adverse events reported by the trials was low, which suggests that current usage is unlikely to be causing significant harm.

Indexed as

Anti-Infective Agents, UrinaryHippuratesHumansMethenamineRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicUrinary Tract InfectionsAnti-Infective Agents, UrinaryHippuratesMethenaminemethenamine hippurate

Identifiers

PMID11869659
OpenAlexW4236097915

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.