ArticleCureus2022
The Role of Urinary Nitrite in Predicting Bacterial Resistance in Urine Culture Analysis Among Patients With Uncomplicated Urinary Tract Infection.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective This study aims to determine the relationship between the presence of urinary nitrite and bacterial resistance to antimicrobial therapy in patients with uncomplicated urinary tract infections. Methods During a six-month time period (April-October, 2020), we reviewed the urine samples of 59 adult outpatients from the Urology Department of Tbilisi State Medical University the First University Clinic with the diagnosis of urinary tract infection. The infecting microorganisms and the presence of urine nitrite were recorded. Resistance rates to the antibiotics were compared between the positive and negative nitrite groups. Chi-squared test was used to perform the statistical analysis using Prism software version 9.3.1 (GraphPad Software, Inc., San Diego, California). Results We examined the correlation between the nitrite-positive and -negative groups with the resistance pattern to ceftriaxone, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX), ampicillin-sulbactam, fosfomycin, amikacin, doxycycline, cefuroxime, cefotaxime, ceftazidime, and nitrofurantoin. A total of 59 outpatients with a mean age of 37 years met the inclusion criteria between April and October 2020. In the positive and negative nitrite groups, there were 23 and 36 patients, respectively. Three (17.6%) of the 17 gram-positive organisms and 20 (62.5%) of the 42 gram-negative organisms yielded positive nitrite results. In nitrite-positive group, resistance rates to ceftriaxone, TMP-SMX, ampicillin-sulbactam, fosfomycin, amikacin, doxycycline, cefuroxime, cefotaxime, ceftazidime, and nitrofurantoin were 52.2%, 70.8%, 63.5%, 67.7%, 25.8%, 31.9%, 29.6%, 32.5%, 22.5% and 83.8%, respectively. These values in the nitrite-negative group were 6.5%, 41.3%, 60.7%, 72.9%, 49%, 3%, 2.3%, 3.3%, 4.3% and 81.9%, respectively. Highest relative resistance rate was recorded against cefuroxime (12.9), followed by doxycycline (10.6), cefotaxime (9.8), ceftriaxone (8.03), ceftazidime (5.2), TMP-SMX (1.71), ampicillin-sulbactam (1.05), nitrofurantoin (1.02), fosfomycin (0.93), and amikacin (0.53). The most commonly isolated pathogen was
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.