Observational studyBMC infectious diseases2026
Antimicrobial resistance patterns and difficult-to-treat resistance in uropathogens among diabetic and non-diabetic patients: a cross-sectional study.
Observational study in BMC infectious diseases, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhile antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global challenge, data comparing Difficult-to-Treat Resistance (DTR) in diabetic versus non-diabetic urinary tract infection (UTI) patients is scarce. This study uniquely evaluates DTR and first-line resistance patterns to inform targeted empirical treatment strategies for these distinct patient cohorts.
methodsA prospective observational cross-sectional study was conducted from August 2021 to January 2024, at a tertiary care teaching hospital in Vadodara, Gujarat, India. During the period, 2408 patients with symptoms of UTI were screened for urine culture and sensitivity, of which 954 individuals tested positive for UTIs.
resultOf the 2,408 symptomatic patients screened, 954 (39.61%) tested positive. The within-group UTI positivity rate was 27.4% (280/1,023) among diabetic patients and 48.7% (674/1,385) among non-diabetic patients. Among the isolated uropathogens, Escherichia coli (E. coli) (56.78%, 62.90%) was the predominant organism followed by Pseudomonas aeruginosa (P. aeruginosa) (13.57%, 5.78%) and Klebsiella spp. (13.21%, 17.35%) in diabetic and non-diabetic respectively. Among all the isolated uropathogen tetracycline (81.25%) and penicillin (71.86%) groups of antibiotics showed high resistance in diabetic patients, whereas fluoroquinolones had highest resistance in non-diabetic with 67.59%. However, the carbapenem, phosphonic and nitrofuran group of antibiotics showed least resistance in both diabetic and non-diabetic populations. Among all the antimicrobial drugs tested in our study, the first line of drugs was further analyzed, and P. aeruginosa had the highest DTR in both diabetic and non-diabetic individuals.
conclusionDespite lower culture positivity rates among diabetic patients, diabetic UTI cases demonstrated substantially higher AMR burden and DTR compared to non-diabetics. P. aeruginosa showed highest DTR prevalence. Penicillin and tetracycline resistance were markedly elevated in diabetic UTIs, while nitrofurantoin and fosfomycin maintained high effectiveness in both groups. These findings emphasize that diabetes is strongly associated with greater therapeutic complexity and multidrug resistance burden, necessitating resistance-guided empirical therapy and regional antibiogram surveillance for optimal UTI management.
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.