Elyse Potvin, Kelsey Adams, Diego Barrieras, Stephane Bolduc, Caroline Quach
{"title":"Impact of antibiotic prophylaxis on urinary tract infection recurrence in children","authors":"Elyse Potvin, Kelsey Adams, Diego Barrieras, Stephane Bolduc, Caroline Quach","doi":"10.5489/cuaj.8678","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Given the potential consequences associated with urinary tract infections (UTI), it has become standard practice to use continuous antibiotic prophylaxis (CAP) in children, even if controversial. We reviewed the effectiveness of CAP on recurrent UTI in a pediatric population to determine if equipoise remains and allow for a placebo control group to study the effectiveness of the vaccine MV140.\nMethod: We completed a rapid review. We searched Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library and data extraction was completed by a single reviewer. Our search criteria were 2005–2022, English and French language, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews only. The population was 19 years and younger, including: vesicoureteral reflux (VUR), congenital anomalies of the kidneys and urinary tracts (CAKUT), and bladder and bowel dysfunction (BBD).\nResults: Three RCTs and three systematic reviews found a benefit for CAP, mostly for a population with VUR, and those with severe VUR have more benefit. Most studies were not able to show a difference in the rate of UTIs or new renal scars (NRS). Three RCTs found a deleterious effect with CAP. Other studies were able to prove a benefit for patients with dilatation of the urinary tract without obstruction and high-grade VUR combined with BBD. The major adverse event found was antimicrobial resistance.\nConclusions: High-risk patients benefit from CAP. The potential consequences of UTIs makes it unethical to use a placebo-only control group for them; however, CAP use seems difficult to justify in a low-risk population.","PeriodicalId":38001,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Urological Association Journal","volume":"24 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Urological Association Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.8678","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Given the potential consequences associated with urinary tract infections (UTI), it has become standard practice to use continuous antibiotic prophylaxis (CAP) in children, even if controversial. We reviewed the effectiveness of CAP on recurrent UTI in a pediatric population to determine if equipoise remains and allow for a placebo control group to study the effectiveness of the vaccine MV140.
Method: We completed a rapid review. We searched Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library and data extraction was completed by a single reviewer. Our search criteria were 2005–2022, English and French language, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews only. The population was 19 years and younger, including: vesicoureteral reflux (VUR), congenital anomalies of the kidneys and urinary tracts (CAKUT), and bladder and bowel dysfunction (BBD).
Results: Three RCTs and three systematic reviews found a benefit for CAP, mostly for a population with VUR, and those with severe VUR have more benefit. Most studies were not able to show a difference in the rate of UTIs or new renal scars (NRS). Three RCTs found a deleterious effect with CAP. Other studies were able to prove a benefit for patients with dilatation of the urinary tract without obstruction and high-grade VUR combined with BBD. The major adverse event found was antimicrobial resistance.
Conclusions: High-risk patients benefit from CAP. The potential consequences of UTIs makes it unethical to use a placebo-only control group for them; however, CAP use seems difficult to justify in a low-risk population.
期刊介绍:
Published by the Canadian Urological Association, the Canadian Urological Association Journal (CUAJ) released its first issue in March 2007, and was published four times that year under the guidance of founding editor (Editor Emeritus as of 2012), Dr. Laurence H. Klotz. In 2008, CUAJ became a bimonthly publication. As of 2013, articles have been published monthly, alternating between print and online-only versions (print issues are available in February, April, June, August, October, and December; online-only issues are produced in January, March, May, July, September, and November). In 2017, the journal launched an ahead-of-print publishing strategy, in which accepted manuscripts are published electronically on our website and cited on PubMed ahead of their official issue-based publication date. By significantly shortening the time to article availability, we offer our readers more flexibility in the way they engage with our content: as a continuous stream, or in a monthly “package,” or both. CUAJ covers a broad range of urological topics — oncology, pediatrics, transplantation, endourology, female urology, infertility, and more. We take pride in showcasing the work of some of Canada’s top investigators and providing our readers with the latest relevant evidence-based research, and on being the primary repository for major guidelines and other important practice recommendations. Our long-term vision is to become an essential destination for urology-based research, education, and advocacy for both physicians and patients, and to act as a springboard for discussions within the urologic community.