ArticleAtencion primaria
[Antimicrobial susceptibility of Escherichia coli producers of community urinary tract infections in Galicia (Spain). Period: 2016-2017].
Article in Atencion primaria. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Influence of a microbiological commentary on the management of asymptomatic bacteriuria.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2025Article
- Regional variations in antimicrobial susceptibility of community-acquired uropathogenicIJID regions · 2024Article
- Escherichia coli resistance patterns, empiric and targeted antibiotic prescriptions in children: a single center experience.Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 2022Article
- Trends in Incidence and Outcomes of Hospitalizations for Urinary Tract Infection among Older People in Spain (2001-2018).Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Uropathogens antibiotic susceptibility as an indicator for the empirical therapy used for urinary tract infections: a retrospective observational study.Iranian journal of microbiology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveEscherichia coli (E. coli) is responsible for the majority of community urinary tract infections. The objective of the study is to know the sensitivity spectrum of E. coli in urinary tract infections to be able to recommend the appropriate empirical antibiotic treatment.
designCross-sectional, multicentric, retrospective study. LOCATION: Galician 8 public hospitals, practically the entire population of Galicia (Spain).
participants43,137 outpatients with urinary tract infection due to E. coli isolated in urine in 2016/2017. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Analyzed variables: demographic, minimum inhibitory concentration and interpretation of sensitivity according to CLSI criteria and resistance mechanisms. The antibiotics studied were: ampicillin, amoxicillin-clavulanic acid, ciprofloxacin, cefotaxime, cefepime, gentamicin, nitrofurantoin, fosfomycin, cotrimoxazole, imipenem and ertapenem. The identification and sensitivity were made mainly by automated methods.
resultsThe percentages of non-sensitivity of E. coli isolates were: ampicillin 49.2%, amoxicillin-clavulanic acid 17.8%, cefotaxime 6.7%, cefepime 5.7%, ertapenem 0.04%, imipenem 0.05%, gentamicin 9,1%, ciprofloxacin 26.2%, fosfomycin 3.3%, nitrofurantoin 2.4% and cotrimoxazole 23.9%. The non-sensitivities were higher in men and as age increases. Six percent of E. coli were producers of extended-spectrum beta-lactamases.
conclusionsThe empirical treatment in Galicia for uncomplicated cystitis produced by E. coli in women continues to be nitrofurantoin and fosfomycin. In men under 15 years of age, fosfomycin is indicated and in men older than 15 years, treatment in our environment should include culture and administer a 3rd generation oral cephalosporin empirically. Cotrimoxazole and ciprofloxacin are not recommended as empirical treatment because of their high resistance rates.
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.