SynthesisUrolithiasis2026
Antibiotic prophylaxis before shock wave lithotripsy in patients with sterile urine: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Urolithiasis, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Whether routine antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) should be administered before shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) in patients with sterile urine remains controversial. We aimed to evaluate the effect of AP in this population. We systematically searched Web of Science, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and PubMed through November 20, 2025. The primary outcome was the composite overall infection risk, and secondary outcomes included symptomatic urinary tract infection (UTI), asymptomatic bacteriuria (AB), pyelonephritis, and sepsis. Ten randomized controlled trials involving 3,298 patients were included. AP did not significantly reduce the composite overall infection risk (RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.54-1.25; p = 0.35) or AB (RR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.57-1.13; p = 0.21), but reduced symptomatic UTI (RR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.29-0.97; p = 0.04). In the only trial reporting pyelonephritis, AP reduced the of pyelonephritis (RR, 0.05; 95% CI, 0.003-0.93; p = 0.04). No sepsis events were reported. Prediction interval and TSA analyses indicated that the symptomatic UTI finding was not definitive. These findings do not support routine universal prophylaxis in all patients with sterile urine undergoing SWL, but may support individualized use in selected patients after considering baseline infection risk, antimicrobial resistance, and antimicrobial stewardship.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42287451What 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.