Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30734071›Full record

SynthesisWorld journal of urology2020

A systematic review of the clinical significance of nephrostomy urine cultures.

Deepak Batura, G Gopal Rao

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in World journal of urology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Urogenital infections.World journal of urology · 2020
    Article
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Deepak BaturaDepartment of Urology, London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust, Watford Road, Harrow, London, HA1 3UJ, UK. deepakbatura@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2833-1819
G Gopal RaoDepartment of Microbiology, London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust, Watford Road, Harrow, London, HA1 3UJ, UK.
London North West Healthcare NHS Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThere are few published reviews that have assessed the clinical utility of renal urine cultures following percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN). In this systematic review, we evaluated the published evidence of the clinical utility of nephrostomy urine cultures in the light of emerging antimicrobial resistance and need for stewardship.

methodsWe performed a systematic literature search and review for evidence on the utility and role of nephrostomy urine cultures, using Medline, Embase and PubMed. We looked for evidence to assess whether there is any utility in collecting renal urine for culture at the time of percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN) and if the culture results of nephrostomy urine and bladder urine are different. We studied outcomes of treatment based on nephrostomy culture results. We also examined the role of PCN cultures at the time of routine nephrostomy exchange. Finally, we assessed if doing a PCN leads to infection or pyelonephritis.

resultsFrom 94 studies initially identified, we finally selected two randomised clinical trials (RCT), six original articles and five detailed conference abstracts for the review. These studies suggest that PCN urine cultures are overall useful in clinical practice. They are useful in selecting appropriate antimicrobial treatment for urosepsis following upper urinary obstruction. There does not appear to be any advantage in performing PCN cultures at routine nephrostomy exchanges. Occasionally, PCN itself can lead to subsequent urosepsis.

conclusionNephrostomy urine cultures have utility in clinical practice and can help support treatment and antimicrobial stewardship.

Indexed as

BacteriaBiomarkersHumansNephrotomySurgical Wound InfectionUrinary CalculiUrinary Tract InfectionsBiomarkersBacteriuriaDrainagePercutaneous nephrostomyRisk factorsUrinalysisUrinary tract infections

Identifiers

PMID30734071
OpenAlexW2911411982

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.