ReviewNature reviews. Urology2012
Antibiotic prophylaxis in antenatal nonrefluxing hydronephrosis, megaureter and ureterocele.
Review in Nature reviews. Urology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bilateral primary nonrefluxing unobstructed megaureter in an adult: a case report and review of the literature.Journal of medical case reports · 2025Review
- Impact of antibiotic prophylaxis on urinary tract infection recurrence in children Rapid review.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2024Review
- Primary non-refluxing megaureter: Natural history, follow-up and treatment.European journal of pediatrics · 2024Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Observation is a conservative management option in infants with nonrefluxing hydronephrosis, primary nonrefluxing megaureter and ureterocele diagnosed postnatally following antenatal detection of hydronephrosis. Antibiotic prophylaxis might be a sensible regimen under these circumstances to prevent UTI in this population who are potentially at increased risk. However, studies examining the efficacy of prophylactic antibiotics are sparse in this setting. For each condition, prophylactic policies seem extremely variable, and UTI rates vary widely with comparable rates reported between patients followed on and off antibiotics. Overall, antibiotic prophylaxis seems unnecessary in patients with isolated low-grade hydronephrosis. Patients with high-grade nonrefluxing hydronephrosis seem at increased risk of UTI, with risk further increasing in patients with associated ureteral dilatation (hydroureteronephrosis) irrespective of the presence of a ureterocele. Obstruction might be an additional independent risk factor, but the diagnosis of obstruction is often possible only in retrospect. The data available suggest that infants are the most at risk of UTI during the first 6 months of life, particularly if they undergo catheterization during workup examinations. Thus, antibiotic prophylaxis might be prudent during the first 6-12 months of life in patients with high-grade hydronephrosis and hydroureteronephrosis with or without ureterocele, and particularly before completion of the diagnostic workup. Paediatric urologists are urged to embark on controlled trials to compare patients followed with and without antibiotic prophylaxis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.