| Literature DB >> 31739385 |
Sarah S Alsubaie1, Mazin A Barry2.
Abstract
Recurrent urinary tract infections (UTIs) in children are associated with development of pyelonephritis and renal scarring. Traditionally, continuous antibiotic prophylaxis (CAP) has been used to prevent recurrent UTI. Recent studies have challenged the efficacy of CAP for preventing renal scarring and have raised concerns about inducing bacterial resistance. This review focuses on studies published between January 2000 and April 2019 and evaluates the use of CAP in children for avoiding recurrent UTIs and renal scarring. A systematic literature search was carried out using the following search terms and related medical subject headings in the MEDLINE electronic database: 'urinary tract infection', 'antimicrobial/antibiotic prophylaxis', and 'children/pediatrics'. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs), original research articles, guidelines, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses describing antibiotic prophylaxis for UTIs were included. A total of 34 RCTs, 9 systematic reviews, and 3 guidelines describing antibiotic prophylaxis were included in this review. The efficacy of CAP for preventing recurrent UTI remains unclear due to non-generalizability of results obtained from suboptimally designed clinical trials. CAP has not been proven as beneficial for preventing new renal scarring in children. Additionally, CAP is associated with increased risk of multidrug resistant infections in children. No conclusive evidence can be drawn from the available clinical data to support routine use of CAP for prevention of renal scarring. Accumulation of evidence from additional well designed studies may result in different conclusions in the future. It is important to identify specific risks for recurrent UTI and ensuing renal injury to ensure more judicious use of CAP.Entities:
Keywords: Anti-bacterial agents; Antibiotic prophylaxis; Child; Pediatrics; Urinary tract infections
Year: 2019 PMID: 31739385 PMCID: PMC6913590 DOI: 10.23876/j.krcp.19.091
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Kidney Res Clin Pract ISSN: 2211-9132
Figure 1Flowchart depicting identification of studies, inclusion, and exclusion assessment for this review.
RCTs, randomized clinical trials; UTI, urinary tract infection.
Studies analyzing uropathogen resistance rates and trends
| Study | Location (time frame) | Age group, number, and design | Uropathogen rate | Resistance rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vazouras et al (2019) [ | Greece (2010–2015) | < 18 yr, 230 inpatient, retrospective | ||
| Yoo et al (2019) [ | Korea (2012–2017) | < 15 yr, 550 children, retrospective | ||
| Erol et al (2018) [ | Turkey (2009–2014) | < 18 yr, 6,515 urine sample, retrospective | ||
| Wang et al (2018) [ | China (2013–2016) | 1 mo–12 yr, 2,316 children, retrospective | ||
| Saperston et al (2014) [ | United States (2009) | < 18 yrs, 25,418 outpatients versus 5,560 inpatients, retrospective database analysis (195 sites) | ||
| Garraffo et al (2014) [ | France (2011) | < 12 yr, 110 children, prospective (multicenter) | ||
| Sakran et al (2015) [ | Israel (2003–2009) | < 18 yr, inpatients 456 first episode vs 106 recurrent UTIs, retrospective | First vs recurrent | All uropathogen resistance (first vs. recurrent) 20% (AMP, TMP/SMX), AMK 8% vs. 0%; GEN 3% vs. 5%, CXM 6% vs. 17%, NIT 6% vs. 19% |
| Mohammad-Jafari et al (2012) [ | Iran (2006–2009) | 1 wk–12 yr, 1,439 urine samples, retrospective | ||
| Ismaili et al (2011) [ | Belgium (2006–2008) | < 3 mo, 209 infants (inpatients), prospective | ||
| Doré-Bergeron et al (2009) [ | Canada (2005–2007) | 1–3 mo, 103, retrospective | All strain resistance: GEN 2% (other resistance patterns not discussed) | |
| Al-Mardeni et al (2009) [ | Jordan (2006–2007) | < 4 yr, 529 children, outpatients | Multidrug-resistant |
AMC, amoxicillin-clavulanate; AMK, amikacin; AMP, ampicillin; CIP, ciprofloxacin; CRO, ceftriaxone; CXM, cefuroxime; ESBL, extended-spectrum beta-lactamase; GEN, gentamicin; GNB, gram-negative bacilli; LEX, cephalexin; NIT, nitrofurantoin; TMP-SMX, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole; UTIs, urinary tract infections.
Randomized controlled trials on antibiotic prophylaxis for preventing UTIs in children (2001–2019)
| Study | No. of children (cases versus control) | Age | VUR grade | Intervention | Placebo use | Follow-up duration (mo) | Outcome | Rate of resistant bacteria to prophylactic antibiotic, prophylaxis no prophylaxis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Garin et al (2006) [ | 218 (100 vs. 118) | 3 mo–18 yr | I–III | TMP-SMX; NTF | No | 12 | No difference in rates of recurrent UTI, pyelonephritis, or development of renal parenchymal scars | 7/7 (100%), 0/1 (0%) |
| Roussey-Kesler et al (2008) [ | 225 (103 vs. 122) | 1–36 mo | I–III | TMP-SMX | No | 18 | No difference in rates of recurrent UTI | 13/18 (73%), 13/32 (39%) |
| Montini et al (2008) [ | 338 (211 vs. 127) | 2 mo–7 yr | I–III | TMP-SMX; Amox/clav | No | 12 | No difference in incidence of febrile UTIs or scarring | 9/15 (60%), 1/12 (8%) |
| Pennesi et al (2008) [ | 100 (50 vs. 50) | 1–30 mo | II–IV | TMP-SMX | No | 24 | No difference in recurrent pyelonephritis or scarring | 42/42 (100%), 0/35 (0%) |
| Craig et al (2009) [ | 576 (288 vs. 288) | Birth–18 yr | I–V | TMP-SMX | Yes | 12 | 14 patient-years of antibiotics to prevent 1 UTI | 24/36 (67%), 13/52 (25%) |
| Brandström et al (2011) [ | 137 (69 vs. 68) | 1–2 yr | III–IV | TMP-SMX | No | 24 | Subgroup analysis comparing 42 girls on prophylaxis with 43 girls on surveillance showed benefit in preventing UTI recurrence and scarring. No difference found in boys | 8/10 (80%), 9/25 (36%) |
| Hoberman et al (2014) [ | 607 (302 vs. 305) | 2 mo–6 yr | I–IV | TMP-SMX | Yes | 24 | 16 patient-years of antibiotics to prevent 1 UTI and 22 patient years to prevent 1 febrile UTI. No difference in renal scarring despite 558/607 (92%) females and 380/607 (62%) having VUR grade 3 or 4 | 26/38 (68%), 17/69 (25%) |
| Hari et al (2015) [ | 93 (47 vs. 46) | 1–12 yr | I–IV | TMP-SMX | Yes | 12 | Higher rate of UTI in prophylaxis group (21% versus 6%) and higher rate of resistant organism in prophylaxis group | 7/12 (58%), 1/5 (20%) |
Amox/clav, amoxicillin-clavulanate; NTF, nitrofurantoin; RIVUR, Randomized Intervention for Children with Vesicoureteral Reflux; TMP-SMX, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole; UTI, urinary tract infection; VUR, vesicoureteral reflex.
P < 0.001,
P = 0.038,
P < 0.001,
P = 0.3.
Figure 2Forest plot depicting risk of urinary tract infections among children receiving prophylactic antibiotics versus those receiving placebo.
CI, confidence interval; M–H, Mantel–Haenszel test; PRIVENT, Prevention of Recurrent Urinary Tract Infection in Children with Vesicoureteric Reflux and Normal Renal Tracts; RIVUR, Randomized Intervention for Children with Vesicoureteral Reflux.
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses on efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis for preventing urinary tract infection in pediatric patients
| Study | Number of studies (no. of subjects) | Antibiotic prophylaxis recommended? | Outcome measure | 95% CI | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Williams et al (2001) [ | 3 (392) | Yes | RR: 0.31 | 0.10–1.00 | Antibiotics reduced risk of recurrent UTI. Most included studies were poorly designed with biases known to overestimate true treatment effect. |
| Williams et al (2006) [ | 8 (618) | Yes | RR: 0.44 | 0.19–1.00 | Antibiotics reduced risk of repeat positive urine culture. |
| Mori et al (2009) [ | 8 (677) | No | RR: 0.96 | 0.69–1.32 | No difference in recurrence of symptomatic UTI or in incidence of new/progressive renal scarring. |
| Dai et al (2010) [ | 11 (2,046) | No | RR: 0.83 | 0.66–1.05 | No effect on incidence of recurrent UTI. |
| Williams and Craig (2011) [ | 5 (1,069) | Yes | RR: 0.68 | 0.48–0.95 | Antibiotics reduced risk of repeat symptomatic UTI but the benefit is small. |
| Wang et al (2015) [ | 8 (1,594) | Yes (for recurrent UTI, not for renal scarring) | OR: 0.63 | 0.42–0.96 | Increase antibiotic resistant uropathogens, OR: 8.75. No reduction in renal scarring. |
| de Bessa et al (2015) [ | 7 (1,593) | Without RIVUR study: yes, only for VUR grade 3,4 | RR: 0.75 (VUR 3, 4) | 0.56–1.01 | |
| With RIVUR study: yes, for all VUR grades | RR: 0.72 (VUR 3, 4) | 0.56–0.92 | |||
| Hewitt et al (2017) [ | 7 (1,427) | No | RR: 0.83 | 0.55–1.26 | No influence of antibiotic prophylaxis in preventing renal scarring (including those with VUR) |
RIVUR, Randomized Intervention for Children with Vesicoureteral Reflux; RR, relative risk; UTI, urinary tract infection; VUR, vesicoureteral reflex.
Denote that RIVUR trial was included in their analysis.