ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2023
Impact of urinary catheter on resistance patterns and clinical outcomes on complicated urinary tract infection.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2023. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical and microbiological characteristics and outcomes of complicated urinary tract infections managed in a hospital-at-home programme: a prospective observational cohort study.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026Article
- From Environmental Organism to Nosocomial Threat:Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Article
- Urinary tract infection in adults: gaps in current guidelines - opinions from an international multidisciplinary panel and relevance to clinical practice.BMC proceedings · 2025Article
- Feasibility and safety of flexible ureteroscopy with intelligent control of renal pelvis pressure without urinary catheter: a retrospective study.BMC urology · 2024Article
- Observational
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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisComplicated urinary tract infection (cUTI) is highly prevalent and costly for health systems. The impact of the indwelling urinary catheter on etiologic agents and clinical outcomes has been poorly studied in Latin America.
methodsCross-sectional study including patients with cUTI, with positive urine culture, treated at Hospital Universitario San Ignacio, Bogotá (Colombia) between 2017 and 2020. Clinical and microbiologic characteristics, treatments and outcomes are explored, comparing those with and without indwelling urinary catheter.
resultsSeven hundred thirty-five patients with non-catheter-associated cUTI (NC-cUTI) and 165 with catheter-associated cUTI (CAUTI) were included. CAUTI group had a higher proportion of recurrent UTI (18% vs 33.3%, p < 0.001), ICU requirement (2.7% vs 8.5%, p < 0.001), longer hospital stay (6 vs 10 days, p < 0.001) and > 30 days unplanned readmission rate (5.8% vs 10.3%, p < 0.001). In the same group, we found a higher frequency of Pseudomonas spp (2.6% vs 9.4%, p < 0.001), Enterococcus spp. (2.4% vs 3.3%, p = 0.016), Serratia marcescens (0.6% vs 3.3%, p < 0.001) and Citrobacter freundii (0.5% vs 5.7%, p < 0.001). It implied a higher number of patients treated with fourth-generation cephalosporins (1.4% vs 4.8%, p = 0.004), ertapenem (32.9% vs 41.8%, p = 0.027) and carbapenems associated with a second antibiotic (1.9% vs 8.5%, p < 0.001).
conclusionsPatients with CAUTI have a higher frequency of resistant germs, require greater use of resources and have worse clinical outcomes than patients who do not require such devices. Measures should be strengthened to minimize its use, in both the hospital and outpatient setting.
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.