Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23152271›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2012

Interventions for preventing recurrent urinary tract infection during pregnancy.

Caroline Schneeberger, Suzanne E Geerlings, Philippa Middleton, Caroline A Crowther

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. UroPathogenicFrontiers in microbiology · 2017
    Review
  5. Review
  6. The Basics of Bacteriuria: Strategies of Microbes for Persistence in Urine.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2016
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Caroline SchneebergerDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Tropical Medicine and AIDS, Academic Medical Center,Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, Noord Holland, Netherlands. carolineschneeberger@gmail.com
Suzanne E Geerlings
Philippa Middleton
Caroline A Crowther
University of Adelaide · AUAcademic Medical Center · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecurrent urinary tract infections (RUTI) are common in women who are pregnant and may cause serious adverse pregnancy outcomes for both mother and child including preterm birth and small-for-gestational-age babies. Interventions used to prevent RUTI in women who are pregnant can be pharmacological (antibiotics) or non-pharmacological (cranberry products, acupuncture, probiotics and behavioural modifications). So far little is known about the best way to prevent RUTI in pregnant women.

objectivesTo assess the effects of interventions for preventing recurrent urinary tract infections in pregnant women.The primary maternal outcomes were RUTI before birth (variously defined) and preterm birth (before 37 weeks). The primary infant outcomes were small-for-gestational age and total mortality. SEARCH

methodsWe searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (8 June 2012) and reference lists of retrieved articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Published, unpublished and ongoing randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, clustered-randomised trials and abstracts of any intervention (pharmacological and non-pharmacological) for preventing RUTI during pregnancy (compared with another intervention, placebo or with usual care). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently evaluated the one identified trial for inclusion and assessed trial quality. Two review authors extracted data. Data were checked for accuracy. MAIN

resultsThe review included one trial involving 200 women. The trial compared a daily dose of nitrofurantoin and close surveillance (regular clinic visit, urine cultures and antibiotics when a positive culture was found) with close surveillance only. No significant differences were found for the primary outcomes: recurrent pyelonephritis (risk ratio (RR) 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31 to 2.53, one study, 167 women), recurrent urinary tract infection before birth (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.06 to 1.38; one study 167 women) and preterm birth (before 37 weeks) (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.42 to 3.35; one study 147 women). The incidence of asymptomatic bacteriuria (ASB) (at least 10(3) colonies per mL) (secondary outcome), only reported in women with a clinic attendance rate of more than 90% (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.89; one study, 102 women), was significantly reduced in women who received nitrofurantoin and close surveillance. AUTHORS'

conclusionsA daily dose of nitrofurantoin and close surveillance has not been shown to prevent RUTI compared with close surveillance alone. A significant reduction of ASB was found in women with a high clinic attendance rate and who received nitrofurantoin and close surveillance. There was limited reporting of both primary and secondary outcomes for both women and infants. No conclusions can be drawn regarding the optimal intervention to prevent RUTI in women who are pregnant. Randomised controlled trials comparing different pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions are necessary to investigate potentially effective interventions to prevent RUTI in women who are pregnant.

Indexed as

Anti-Infective Agents, UrinaryBacteriuriaFemaleHumansNitrofurantoinPregnancyPregnancy Complications, InfectiousRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSecondary PreventionUrinary Tract InfectionsWatchful WaitingAnti-Infective Agents, UrinaryNitrofurantoin

Identifiers

PMID23152271
OpenAlexW4230845891

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.