ArticlePediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany)2015
The RIVUR study: a review of its findings.
Article in Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The epidemiology of kidney and urinary tract infections in pediatric chronic kidney disease: prevalence, risk factors and association with GFR decline in the Chronic Kidney Disease in Children Study.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2026Article
- Conflicting views of physicians and surgeons concerning pediatric urinary tract infection: a comparative review.Pediatric radiology · 2023Review
- Ureteral Obstruction After Endoscopic Treatment of Vesicoureteral Reflux: Does the Type of Injected Bulking Agent Matter?Current urology reports · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe conclusion drawn by the authors of the Randomized Intervention for Children with Vesicoureteral Reflux (RIVUR) trial is that antimicrobial prophylaxis reduces the risk of recurrent urinary tract infection (UTI)-but not of renal scarring-in patients with vesicoureteral reflux (VUR).
resultsA review of the findings showed that the decreased recurrent UTI rate was only present at the end of the 2-year follow-up period and was only slightly increased (12.3%) above the 10% cutoff for statistical significance. The difference was not observed in children younger than two years of age with VUR grade III and IV. In addition, the rate of new renal scarring was not statistically different between the prophylaxis and placebo groups (8.2 vs. 8.4%, respectively). A high rate of uropathogen antibiotic resistance was observed in the prophylaxis group (68.4 vs. 24.6%, respectively).
conclusionThe analysis of the RIVUR findings questions the validity of its authors suggestion that the results may warrant reconsideration of the current recommendations by the American Academy of Pediatrics on obtaining a voiding cystourethrogram after the first febrile UTI and the use of urinary antibiotic prophylaxis in VUR patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25503325What 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.