ArticleBMC pediatrics2026
Antibiotic prophylaxis in the context of VCUG/VUS in children: results of a multinational survey.
Article in BMC pediatrics, 2026. 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.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeVoiding cystourethrography (VCUG) and voiding urosonography (VUS) are standard procedures in children for diagnosing vesicoureteral reflux (VUR) but may cause postprocedural urinary tract infections (ppUTIs). The necessity of periprocedural antibiotic prophylaxis remains controversial, and no standardized guidelines exist. This survey investigates current antibiotic prophylaxis practices among paediatric specialists performing VCUG/VUS.
methodsAn online questionnaire was distributed to paediatricians, paediatric radiologists, paediatric nephrologists, paediatric surgeons, and paediatric urologists to evaluate current practices regarding antibiotic prophylaxis in the context of VCUG and VUS.
resultsA total of 126 responses from 20 countries were analyzed, mostly from Germany (63%, 79/126). Antibiotic prophylaxis during VCUG/VUS was routinely used by 58% (73/126) of respondents, while 13% (16/126) reported never using it and 29% (37/126) refrained from antibiotic prophylaxis in specific circumstances. Trimethoprim, cefaclor, and nitrofurantoin were the most common agents, with 48% (53/110) of respondents adapting their choice of antibiotic according to the patient’s age. Dosage and timing varied widely, including prophylactic, therapeutic, and double prophylactic doses. Age-inappropriate drug use was reported in 15% (16/110) of respondents. Significant differences between specialties were not found, but marked international variation in prophylaxis practices was observed.
conclusionThis survey demonstrates substantial variability in periinterventional antibiotic prophylaxis for VCUG and VUS in children. Differences in indication, agent choice, dosing, and time schedule reflect the absence of unified evidence-based standards. A standardized, multidisciplinary approach integrating current evidence and individual risk assessment is essential to optimize patient safety and antimicrobial stewardship.
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.