Observational studyBMC urology2021
Current antibiotic resistance patterns of rare uropathogens: survey from Central European Urology Department 2011-2019.
Observational study in BMC urology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of the global prevalence of fluoroquinolone resistant Morganella morganii clinical isolates.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- Global mapping of antibiotic resistance rates among clinical isolates of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials · 2024Pooled it
- The prevalence of colistin resistance in clinical Stenotrophomonas maltophilia isolates worldwide: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC microbiology · 2023Pooled it
- Antimicrobial Resistance and ESBL-Associated Predictors Among Uropathogens: A 2019-2024 Isolate-Level Study.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
- Incidence and Resistance Patterns ofMicroorganisms · 2025Article
- Knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding urinary tract infections among women in the United Arab Emirates.PloS one · 2025Article
- Antibiotic prophylaxis prior to transrectal prostate biopsy in Croatia: A national survey.Urologia · 2023Article
- Antibiotic Resistances of Enterobacteriaceae with Chromosomal Ampc in Urine Cultures: Review and Experience of a Spanish Hospital.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Natural Polyphenols for Prevention and Treatment of Urinary Tract Infections.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Interplay between Phenotypic Resistance to Relevant Antibiotics in Gram-Negative Urinary Pathogens: A Data-Driven Analysis of 10 Years' Worth of Antibiogram Data.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Urinary Tract Infections in Elderly Patients: A 10-Year Study on Their Epidemiology and Antibiotic Resistance Based on the WHO Access, Watch, Reserve (AWaRe) Classification.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWhile the resistance rates of commonly detected uropathogens are well described, those of less frequent Gram-negative uropathogenic bacteria have seldom been reported. The aim of this study was to examine the resistance rates of less frequent uropathogenic Gram-negatives in a population of patients treated in a Department of Urology of a tertiary referral centre in Central Europe over a period of 9 years.
methodsData on all positive urine samples from urological in- and out-patients were extracted form the Department of Clinical Microbiology database from 2011 to 2019. Numbers of susceptible and resistant isolates per year were calculated for these uropathogens: Acinetobacter spp. (n = 74), Citrobacter spp. (n = 60), Enterobacter spp. (n = 250), Morganella morganii (n = 194), Providencia spp. (n = 53), Serratia spp. (n = 82) and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia (n = 27). Antimicrobial agents selected for the survey included: ampicillin, amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, piperacillin/tazobactam; cefuroxime, cefotaxime, ceftazidime and cefepime; ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin; gentamicin and amikacin; ertapenem, meropenem and imipenem; trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (co-trimoxazole), nitrofurantoin and colistin.
resultsPenicillin derivatives have generally poor effect except piperacillin/tazobactam. Cefuroxime is not efficient unlike cefotaxime (except against Acinetobacter spp. and S. maltophilia). Susceptibility to fluoroquinolones is limited. Amikacin is somewhat more efficient than gentamicine but susceptibilities for both safely exceed 80%. Nitrofurantoin shows virtually no efficiency. Cotrimoxazole acts well against Citrobacter spp., Serratia spp. and it is the treatment of choice for S. maltophilia UTIs. Among carbapenems, ertapenem was less efficient than meropenem and imipenem except for S. maltophilia whose isolates were mostly not suceptible to any carbapenems.
conclusionsUropathogenic microorganisms covered in this report are noteworthy for their frequently multi-drug resistant phenotypes. Knowledge of resistance patterns helps clinicians choose the right empirical antibiotic treatment when the taxonomical assignment of the isolate is known but sensitivity results are pending.
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.