Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26754121›Full record

ReviewDeutsches Arzteblatt international2015

Urosepsis--Etiology, Diagnosis, and Treatment.

Nici Markus Dreger, Stephan Degener, Parviz Ahmad-Nejad, Gabriele Wöbker, Stephan Roth

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 72 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
72citing papers in PubMed
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

72 citing papers in PubMed, 130 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. CAUTIon - not all UTIs are the same.Nature reviews. Urology · 2025
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Prevalence of ESBL-producingOne health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2025
    Review

12 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nici Markus DregerDepartment of Adult and Pediatric Urology, Witten/Herdecke University, HELIOS, Klinikum Wuppertal, Center for Research in Clinical Medicine (ZFKM), Institute for Microbiology and Laboratory Medicine, Witten/Herdecke University, Center for Research in Clinical Medicine (ZFKM), HELIOS Klinikum, Wuppertal, Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Witten/Herdecke University, HELIOS, Klinikum Wuppertal.
Stephan Degener
Parviz Ahmad-Nejad
Gabriele Wöbker
Stephan Roth
Helios Universitätsklinikum Wuppertal · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSepsis is among the most common causes of death in Germany. Urosepsis accounts for 9-31% of all cases and has a mortality of 20-40%, which is low compared with that of sepsis in general. As the population ages, the incidence of urosepsis is likely to rise.

methodsReview of pertinent articles and guidelines retrieved by a selective search in PubMed.

resultsEnterobacteria and Gram-positive organisms are the pathogens that most commonly cause urosepsis. The diagnosis can and must be made early on the basis of the typical clinical features, altered vital signs, and laboratory abnormalities, so that timely treatment can be initiated. 80% of cases are due to obstructive uropathy. The diagnostic evaluation includes physical examination, blood cultures, urinalysis, procalcitonin measurement, and ultrasonography. In one study, each additional hour of delay in the treatment of urosepsis with antibiotics was found to lower the survival rate by 7.6%. Antibiotics should be chosen in consideration of local resistance patterns and the expected pathogen spectrum.

conclusionUrologists, intensive care specialists, and microbiologists should all be involved in the interdisciplinary treatment of urosepsis. Patients' outcomes have improved recently, probably because of the frequent use of minimally invasive treatments to neutralize foci of infection. New biomarkers and new treatments still need to be validated in multicenter trials.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsBacterial InfectionsEvidence-Based MedicineHumansPractice Guidelines as TopicSepsisTreatment OutcomeUrinary Tract InfectionsAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID26754121
PMCPMC4711296
OpenAlexW2396547824

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.