SynthesisFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2026
A bibliometric and visual analysis of research on echinocandin treatment for urinary tract infections based on VOSviewer and CiteSpace.
Synthesis in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Echinocandins have emerged as potential therapeutic options for urinary tract infections (UTIs), particularly involving multidrug-resistant fungi. Given the fragmented nature of the evidence and the lack of comprehensive synthesis, this study aimed to systematically evaluate the global research landscape, collaboration networks, and emerging hotspots in this field through a bibliometric analysis. Methods: Publications related to echinocandin therapy for UTIs from database inception to March 20, 2026 were retrieved from PubMed and Web of Science. This bibliometric review was conducted and reported in accordance with the BIBLIO (Preliminary Guideline for Reporting Bibliometric Reviews of the Biomedical Literature) minimum requirements. VOSviewer (1.6.20) was used for collaboration network and keyword co-occurrence analysis. CiteSpace (6.4.R1) was used for burst detection, timeline visualization, and cluster analysis. Additional bibliometric indicators including total citations, average citations per publication, H-index, citation density, and identification of influential journals were calculated. Results: A total of 47 publications were included, with peaks in 2016 and 2025 (six each). The limited number of publications reflects the emerging nature of this research field and the ongoing debate regarding the role of echinocandins in UTI management. The United States and Spain were leading contributors. Keyword analysis revealed a shift from early themes toward multidrug-resistant pathogens, particularly Candida auris, Candida glabrata, and multidrug resistance. Cluster analysis identified eight significant clusters Q = 0.755, S = 0.9196, focusing on candidate drugs, pathogen identification, and antifungal resistance mechanisms. Conclusion: Research on echinocandins for UTIs remains limited but shows sustained interest. The field has evolved toward multidrug-resistant fungal pathogens. Lack of robust clinical evidence remains a major barrier. Future studies should prioritize prospective clinical investigations and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic evaluations.Robust prospective clinical studies and PK/PD evaluations remain essential to establish definitive therapeutic role. We advocate for updated, evidence-based stewardship protocols that clearly define indications for echinocandin use in fluconazole-refractory UTIs.
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.