Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42081090›Full record

ReviewUrologie (Heidelberg, Germany)2026

[Uncomplicated urinary tract infections: antibiotic-sparing approaches].

Sebastian Graf

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Sebastian GrafKepler Universitätsklinikum Linz, Krankenhausstraße 9, 4020, Linz, Österreich. sebastian.graf@kepleruniklinikum.at.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWith increasing antimicrobial resistance, the attractiveness of antibiotic-sparing approaches in urinary tract infections increases.

objectivesCurrent evidence on alternative treatment options to antibiotics in urinary tract infections. MATERIALS AND

methodsA narrative review of current guidelines and selected literature was performed.

resultsRates of symptom relief or symptom resolution are comparable between nonantibiotic and antibiotic therapies. A small risk increase of pyelonephritis remains but does not influence the overall recommendation of an antibiotic-sparing therapy. Outside of the well-defined group of young and healthy women, there is a marked lack of evidence; hence, antibiotics remain standard treatment.

conclusionIn nongeriatric healthy women, antibiotic-sparing treatment of urinary tract infections is a viable and increasingly proven alternative. Outside this collective, evidence remains insufficient.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsUrinary Tract InfectionsAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalFemaleHumansPhytotherapyPractice Guidelines as TopicPyelonephritisAnti-Bacterial AgentsAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalAntibiotic stewardshipCombination therapyDiabetes mellitusNon-steroidal anti-inflammatory agentsPhytotherapy

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.