Towards new strategies in complicated urinary tract infection
Nieuwkoop, C. van
Citation
Nieuwkoop, C. van. (2011, February 17). Towards new strategies in complicated urinary tract infection. Retrieved from
https://hdl.handle.net/1887/16504
Version: Corrected Publisher’s Version
License: Licence agreement concerning inclusion of doctoral thesis in the Institutional Repository of the
University of Leiden
Downloaded from: https://hdl.handle.net/1887/16504
Note: To cite this publication please use the final published version (if applicable).
173
D I S C U S S I O N
174
175
Part 1 Clinical aspects of febrile urinary tract infection
In part I of this thesis, unresolved issues in the management of febrile urinary tract infection (UTI) are discussed point-by-point following the clinical questions 1, 2.
When should a patient with febrile UTI be hospitalized?
In the Netherlands, the vast majority of patients with urinary tract infection (UTI) are managed by general practitioners (GP) according to the guideline of the Dutch College of General Practitioners on the management of UTIs 3. Being within the top rank on the list of most common reasons for consulting a GP, UTIs are part of the routine daily practice of primary care 4, 5. As most UTIs are limited to the bladder, a short course of antibiotic treatment will usually suffice and referral for specialist care is rarely needed 3, 6. The incidence of resistant causal uropathogens is low but even than the symptoms of UTI generally relieve with empirical antibiotic or symptomatic treatment 6-8. Thus, to a considerable extent, UTI at primary care is indeed a self-limiting disease.
However, when fever develops the management of UTI at primary care is not that straightforward.
Fever in UTI is considered to be a sign of more advanced disease reflecting bacterial invasion of tissues of the urinary tract. Usually, this implies the presence of acute pyelonephritis but in men it may also represent the presence of bacterial prostatitis (Figure 1) 9-11. Furthermore, fever may be a first sign of bacterial invasion of the blood stream, that is bacteremia (Figure 1). Accompanied with the systemic inflammatory response syndrome any UTI, especially those caused by gram-neg- ative microorganisms, may progress to a life-threatening severe urosepsis, multiple organ failure and ultimately death 12-16. Still, though the overall mortality rate of acute pyelonephritis is around 0.3%, the risk of mortality in bacteremic UTI patients is notably higher ranging from 7% to 50%, that depends mainly on the severity of underlying coexisting diseases 12, 17-20. Thus, when con- fronted with a febrile UTI patient, the attending GP first of all needs to evaluate whether the patient is at risk for such deterioration (Figure 1), in order to judge whether outpatient management with oral antibiotics is safe or referral to hospital is needed. However, clear guidance from the medical literature to back up such judgment is limited as the majority of studies on outpatient management were restricted to non-pregnant otherwise healthy young to middle aged women 21-28. Moreover, the definition of ‘young to middle aged woman’ differed between studies. Yet, there is general consen- sus that at least premenopausal previously healthy nonpregnant women with febrile UTI or acute pyelonephritis are good candidates for outpatient management with oral antibiotic treat- ment 29-31. Whether patients with coexisting diseases, the elderly and men can also be managed as outpatients remains unclear and has not been addressed in any prospective study. However, based on expert opinion, general recommendations might be followed. Ramakrishnan et al proposed to use the following absolute indications for referral to hospital in patients with acute pyelonephritis:
Flow of events in extending UTI. After peri-urethral colonization, the uropathogen invades the bladder (cystitis). Then it may ascend to the kidney (acute pyelonphritis) and/or translocate to the prostate in men (bacterial prostatitis). Via these routes it can spread to the blood stream (bacteremia or urosepsis syndrome).
figure 1
Fever
Advanced sisease Uropathogen
π Escherichia coli π Proteus spp.
π Klebsiella spp.
π Entercoccus spp.
π Pseudomonas aeroginosa π Staphylococcus spp.
Ureter
Bladder
Prostate Urethra Kidney
Inferior caval vein
persistent vomiting, progression of uncomplicated UTI, suspected sepsis, uncertain diagnosis, urinary tract obstruction and pregnancy, and the following relative indications: age above 60 years, anatomic abnormality of the urinary tract, immunocompromised state (e.g. diabetes mellitus, malignancy), inadequate access to follow-up and frailty 32. The National Health Service (NHS) of the United Kingdom uses similar criteria and specifically emphasizes to use a low threshold for hospitalization in patients with any of the above listed coexisting conditions 33. Furthermore, the NHS stresses that if the patient is treated at home, clinical improvement must be evident within 24 hours of antibiotic therapy. If not, subsequent hospitalization is absolutely indicated 33. Somewhat differently, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists uses less specific criteria for hospitalization, that is: women who are severely ill, have complications, are unable to tolerate oral medications, who the clinician suspects to be noncompliant with outpatient therapy or who does not have a notable clinical response by 48-72 hours 34. In contrast, the guideline of the Dutch College of General Practitioners is less strict and recommends referral to hospital only, in case of pregnancy, suspected sepsis or failure of antibiotic therapy 3. Unfortunately, within this guideline the terms ‘suspected sepsis’ and ‘failure of antibiotic therapy’ are not otherwise specified leaving its interpretation up to the individual GP. According to the NHS and the Society of Critical Care Medicine, clinical signs of sepsis include a body temperature greater than 38
˚
C in combination with marked signs of illness (altered mental state, perfuse sweating, rigors, pallor) and/or sig- nificant tachycardia (pulse rate > 90/min), hypotension or breathlessness (respiratory rate > 20/min) 15, 33. Following this definition, it is not surprising that the majority of febrile UTI patients, in particular those with co-morbidity, do indeed have ‘suspected sepsis’. Thus, despite the available guidelines, dealing with the uncertainty upon need for hospitalization and unpredictability about the risk for complications, GPs may tend to rely on their gut feeling or general sense of alarm 35, 36. With the aim to gain more insight into the risk of complications in febrile UTI and thus to generate tools to help guide physicians in such clinical decision making, we performed a large prospective observational multicenter study including consecutive adults with febrile UTI, either at primary care (PC) or emergency departments (ED) of affiliated hospitals.
In Chapter 1 we describe the results of 153 adults with febrile UTI managed at home by their GP with oral antibiotic therapy (ciprofloxacin) and we compared those to 242 patients who were re- ferred to the hospital 37. We found that the majority of individuals managed at home were patients with co-morbidity above the age of 50 years while a considerable number were men. Moreover, 10% of the patients treated at home had bacteremia but contrary to previous reports this was not associated with a complicated outcome. Indeed, despite the fact that during follow-up about 5%
were hospitalized, no one of these treated at home required admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) nor were there any attributable deaths. In contrast, referred patients had a 7% risk for ICU admission and a 5% mortality risk within 30 days. These patients were characterized by more signs of sepsis (higher body temperature and pulse rate, lower blood pressure) and at ED presentation they more frequently already had antibiotic UTI treatment. We concluded that GPs adhered well to their guideline 3 and together with their gut feeling on severity of disease they were able to
177
select a broad population of patients with febrile UTI for outpatient management. Thus, this study provided the first evidence that even among the elderly, men and patients with co-morbidity or bacteremia, many can safely be treated at home with oral antibiotics.
However, this study also confirmed previous findings that around 90% of febrile UTI patients who present at EDs were subsequently being hospitalized while the majority of those had an uncom- plicated course 17, 37-39. Apparently, ED physicians tend to use a low threshold for hospitalization likely because the referring GP judged the patient not to be manageable at home. This leaves open the question whether part of the hospitalizations might have been avoidable, an important issue on the cost aspect. In this respect, a clinical severity assessment tool dividing febrile UTI patients into low-risk patients being candidates for outpatient management, and high-risk patients being candidates for hospital admission, would be of particular value. For community-acquired pneu- monia there are validated clinical prediction rules guiding need for hospitalization. As there are no such tools for UTI and the predicting factors are not specific for pneumonia, such as age, co-mor- bidity and signs of sepsis, we considered these rules might also apply for febrile UTI 40-43. Thus, we evaluated the predictive value of two bedside-available prediction rules, the modified pneumonia severity index (PSI) and the CRB-65 (newly confusion, respiratory rate ≥ 30/minute, systolic blood pressure < 90 mmHg, age ≥ 65 years), in predicting complicated outcome of febrile UTI defined as death within 30 days or need for ICU admission 40, 42, 43. Using data of the above mentioned study with 787 evaluable patients, the results of this are described in Chapter 2. We found that for pre- dicting 30-day mortality, a modified PSI score (range 18-180 points) of ≥ 100 points and CRB-65 score ≥ 1 point had 86% and 100% sensitivity and 83% and 42% specificity, respectively. The com- posite outcome death within 30 days or ICU admission were predicted with a negative predictive value of 0.98 and 1.00 for modified PSI and CRB-65. Patients with a modified PSI score < 100 points (n = 636) or CRB-65 score < 1 (n = 320) point had a very low risk (<2%) of adverse outcome mak- ing them potential candidates for outpatient management. Using these prediction rules for risk assessment to determine out- or inpatient management, this may save 74% of hospitalizations for febrile UTI when using modified PSI, and 31% when using CRB-65. However, though the results are promising, further validation of these predicting rules among other populations is required before its widespread use for hospitalization guidance can be recommended 44. Moreover, its actual implementation into clinical practice warrants further studies in order to evaluate whether indeed the prediction rule will safely lead to a reduction in hospitalizations. As costs of acute pyelone- phritis are predominantly determined by hospitalizations rates, such a study should preferably include an evaluation of its cost-effectiveness 19, 45, 46. A stepped wedge cluster-randomized non- inferiority trial, sequentially rolling out the intervention (introduction of the modified PSI guiding hospitalization of patients with febrile UTI) at the participating centers (clusters) over a number of time periods, would probably be an ideal and feasible design for such a study 47, 48. Awaiting such validation studies, the current practice of using the Dutch guideline should be continued as this is proofed to be a safe strategy.
178
When should radiologic imaging of the urinary tract be considered in a patient with febrile UTI?
Routine performance of radiologic imaging in UTI are reported to be of little value as the incidence of underlying abnormalities of the urinary tract is low 49, 50. Nevertheless, one of the complications of febrile UTI is the appearance of obstructing renal stones leading to the accumulation of pus in the pyelum, pyonephrosis (Figure 2). This is associated with a protracted clinical course requiring additional drainage therapy and possibly it also requires longer antibiotic treatment. Once the at- tending physicians considers such a complication, radiologic imaging has to be done. Then, ultra- sonograpphy of the urinary tract is the radiologic method of choice as it is non-invasive, readily avail- able, radiation free and sensitive in detecting urinary obstruction 51-54. Usually, attending physicians will only consider radiologic imaging when there is a sufficiently high index of suspicion, as this is a rare complication. However, the clinical signs of pyonephrosis are not specific all be it that the persistence of fever despite 3 days of active antibiotic treatment might be indicative 30, 55-57. To date, this is generally accepted to be an absolute indication for radiologic evaluation. In addition, it has been advocated to consider radiologic imaging in diabetics, men and patients with recurrent UTI or symptoms of urolithiasis 54, 58-60. We noticed that a significant number of febrile UTI patients present- ing at EDs do indeed have such a risk factor and thus underwent radiologic imaging while the yield of detecting clinical relevant abnormalities was low. Therefore, we derived and validated a clinical prediction rule predicting radiologic outcome with the aim to use future radiologic resources more efficiently. The results of this study are discussed in Chapter 3. We found that approximately 70%
of adults presenting at EDs with febrile UTI did undergo radiologic imaging of the urinary tract. A simple prediction rule being the presence of a history of urolithiasis and/or urine pH ≥ 7.0 and/or renal insufficiency (MDRD ≤ 40 ml/min/1.73m3) at presentation accurately predicted clinical relevant radiologic findings 61. Moreover, the absence of these three risk factors ruled out the occurrence of pyonephrosis with 94-100% certainty and withholding radiologic imaging in those without a risk factor would potentially reduce the use of imaging to 40% of the febrile UTI patients (absolute reduc- tion ≈ 30%). However, further confirmation in additional validation and implementation studies is needed. Preferably, such studies will be performed in different settings and populations and include a cost-effectiveness evaluation in order to characterize its definite place in the ED management of febrile UTI patients 44.
In addition, this study evaluated the course of fever. Once on antibiotic treatment, 65%, 82% and 90%
of the patients become afebrile within 1, 2 and 3 days respectively. Such patterns were also noticed in previous studies 62, 63 but contrary to other studies we could not demonstrate a relation between fever duration and the risk for developing a complication like pyonephrosis 55-57, 64. Nevertheless, our data support clinical experience that in febrile UTI patients the fever generally resolves within 72 hours of active antibiotic treatment 34, 56. In this respect, the criterion of the NHS, entailing clinical improvement within 24 hours of antibiotic treatment, appears to be too strict 33. Yet, the term ‘failure of antibiotic therapy’ as used in the Dutch UTI guideline might be specified as ‘clinical deterioration during antibiotic treatment or persistent fever despite 3 days of antibiotic treatment’ 3.
179
obstructed Ureter Obstructed Pyelum
Obstructive Renal stone
Bladder
Prostate Urethra
Kidney Inferior Caval vein
Complication of acute pyelonephritis: obstructive renal stone in the distal right ureter leading to accumulation of pus in the obstructed pyelum (=pyonephrosis).
figure 2
180
Who needs a blood culture when febrile UTI or urosepsis is suspected?
As discussed above, fever in UTI can be a first sign of bacteremia (Figure 1). This is associated with higher mortality, prolonged hospitalization and higher complication rates 12, 17-20, 65-67. For this rea- son clinicians are vigilant to identify bacteremia as soon as the patient presents, because a positive finding may have implications for the therapeutic management. The golden standard for detection of bacteremia remains the performance of at least two blood cultures to achieve sufficient sensitiv- ity 68. The importance of detecting bacteremia has been highlighted by sepsis guidelines and thus in clinical practice a low threshold for obtainment of blood cultures is being practiced 69, 70. By consequence, this approach may not be the most cost-effective one, as the majority of blood cul- tures do not grow any pathogen while the risk of getting a false-positive result (i.e. contamination) amounts to 7% 71. In order to use blood culture resources more efficiently, predictive patient char- acteristics may help to differentiate those with high or low risk for bacteremia. However, clinical models predicting bacteremia in UTI appeared to have poor predictive values 65-67, 72. In this regard, the biomarker procalcitonin (PCT) may be of additional value in predicting bacteremia as it is sup- posed to be a marker of inflammation provoked by bacterial tissue (as opposed to viral) invasion
18, 73. This was subject of a study of which the results are described in Chapter 4. We found that bacteremia was associated with older age, diabetes mellitus, shaking chills, altered mental status and higher temperature and pulse rate but, as previous findings, these predictors could not reliably predict the presence of bacteremia 65-67, 72. In contrast, a PCT value > 0.25 μg/l was a fairly good predictor for bacteremia with a negative and positive predictive value of 97% and 36% respectively.
Using PCT > 0.25 μg/l as a single decision tool for doing a blood culture in febrile UTI would have resulted in 40% (absolute reduction) fewer blood cultures being taken while still identifying 94 to 99% of patients with bacteremia. Such a strategy is likely to be a cost-effective method to avoid unnecessary blood cultures at EDs but this warrants further confirmative studies before the wide- spread use of PCT guidance on doing blood cultures can be recommended.
Another issue upon taking blood cultures in UTI patients has been addressed in Chapter 5 74. As the causal pathogen of UTI can, by definition, be detected in urine, the usefulness of blood cul- tures in febrile UTI patients has been doubted because of its low additional diagnostic value over urine cultures 75-78. This is consistent with the current clinical practice. After obtaining blood and urine specimens for culture, febrile UTI patients will empirically be treated with antibiotics and once the culture result becomes available the antibiotic therapy will be optimized according to the susceptibility of the detected causal pathogen. In almost all cases of bacteremic UTI, the isolated pathogen from the blood is similar to the one isolated from the urine. In other words, the result of the urine culture is sufficient to guide antibiotic treatment. There may however be some situations in which the blood culture result is different from the urine culture result; in previous studies this occurred in about 2% of the cases 75-78. In our study we found the blood and urine cultures to be discordant in 5% of 583 patients with febrile UTI. Furthermore, we demonstrated that discordant urine and blood culture results were associated with prior antibiotic UTI treatment, malignancy and the presence of an indwelling urinary catheter. Taken together with our finding in Chapter 1
181
that bacteremia is of no prognostic value, these findings suggest that in febrile UTI patients blood cultures are of very little clinical relevance. Thus while Chapter 4 discusses a strategy of limiting blood cultures to patients with a PCT value > 0.25 μg/l, an even more efficient strategy might be the avoidance of blood cultures in all febrile UTI patients except those who are severly ill (to help exclude other possible mimicking infections), those on antibiotic treatment or those with under- lying malignancy or an indwelling urinary catheter.
What are risk factors for antibiotic resistance?
In patients with UTI, antimicrobial resistance is associated with prolonged and complicated ill- ness 79, 80. Therefore, when the choice of empirical antibiotic therapy has to be made, the attending physician needs to judge whether there is a considerable risk for a resistant causal uropathogen.
This specifically holds for E. coli, being the most frequent causal pathogen, and its susceptibility to fluoroquinolones (FQs). FQs are the preferred agents for oral empirical therapy of febrile UTI, based on the pharmacokinetic profile (e.g. good tissue level) and low rate of resistance in the com- munity compared to other agents 29, 81-84. However, even for FQs the reported rates of resistance vary over the years and between regions ranging from < 1% to 38% 27, 85, 86. Moreover, there are signs that the incidence of FQ resistant E. coli is also increasing in the Dutch community, espe- cially among patients at urology services 81, 87. Furthermore, it is of concern that the noted rise in resistance may come from an animal reservoir and if so, this may be a potential thread for further spread of resistant E. coli among the community 88-94. Thus, with the data gathered in the previously discussed observational study, we evaluated risk factors for FQ resistant E. coli among patients with febrile UTI and the impact on clinical outcomes. The results of this study are described in Chapter 6.
We found the presence of an indwelling urinary catheter, recent hospitalization to be independent moderate risk factors for FQ resistance, but the foremost risk factor appeared to be individual use of FQs in the preceding six months. In addition, FQ resistance was associated with cross- resistance to other antibiotics (i.e. amoxicillin-clavunalate and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole) whereas FQ susceptibility almost excluded the presence of extended spectrum beta-lactamase. En- vironmental risk factors such as daily contact with pets or livestock, home care medical support or a household member with UTI were not associated with FQ resistance. This does not support the concern for an animal or human reservoir causing FQ resistance it the community. However, it should be emphasized that the current evidence for animal-human and human-human transmis- sion of FQR E. coli in UTI is limited to specific strains 89, 90, 92, 95. Furthermore, it must be realized that our study does not exclude a possible 2-hit mechanism for FQ resistance, with an initial input of FQ resistant strains from food supply of colonized animals into the population followed by se- lection at the individual level by personal FQ use. Further studies are thus still warranted to explore this hypothesis, particularly as to date the relation between animal food supply and FQ resistant E. coli in humans revealed conflicting results but at least indicate this is could be a thread for the community 88, 93, 96, 97.
With respect to clinical outcomes we found no relation between FQ resistance and the duration of fever but, though not statistically significant, there was trend towards a two-fold higher mortality 182
risk. Interestingly, the majority of patients with a FQ resistant strain who were empirically treated with ciprofloxacin, recovered quickly as their fever resolved before the outcome of the urine cul- ture became available and antibiotic treatment was subsequently switched. This may indicate that febrile UTI is to some extent a self-limiting disease or possibly ciprofloxacin may be still effective despite the causing E. coli is deemed to be resistant based on in vitro testing (defined as ciproflo- cacin MICs > 1 mg/L according to EUCAST criteria) 98. Based on the observed absence of a relation between FQ resistance and clinical outcomes, the clinical relevance of detecting resistance at the individual patient level is not straightforward. Nevertheless, as individual FQ use seems to be the driving force for FQ resistance, as has also be demonstrated by many others 85, 99-104, this might be easily detected by just asking the patient’s recent pharmacological history.
How long should a patient with febrile UTI ideally be treated?
Current strategies on the management of UTIs recommend antibiotic treatment for 14 days in case of febrile UTI 3, 30, 32, 34, 105, 106. However, studies in previously healthy young non-pregnant women demonstrated that treatment for 5 to 7 days is sufficient 27, 28. In addition, other studies indicate that in many other patients, such as men, the elderly and patients with co-morbidity, the duration of treatment may also safely be shortened to around 7 days 107-111. However, in none of the studies the duration of treatment was the sole objective. Moreover, studies on patients other than young healthy non-pregnant women were too small to draw definite conclusions. Thus there remains an overall lack of evidence of treatment duration shorter than 14 days.
To address this issue we recently started a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial, in- cluding consecutive adults with febrile UTI. In this study, participating patients are randomised to either 7 or 14 days of antibiotic treatment with the second week being either ciprofloxacin or placebo twice daily. The background, rationale and design of this study are discussed in detail in Chapter 7 112. Awaiting the results of this study, expected to become available in 2011-2012, the above noted recommendations with respect to treatment duration of febrile UTI will sustain.
Part II Relation between pelvic floor dysfunction and urinary tract infection
Part II addresses the possible relation between pelvic floor dysfunction (PFD) and UTI. PFD is a is a general term for functional clinical problems affecting the urinary, rectal and/or sexual function 113. It is generally believed to be a contributing factor for the development of UTI as it disturbs normal bladder emptying and thus enhances bacterial bladder invasion and growth (Figure 3) 114-118.
However, the relation between PFD and UTI has almost exclusively been studied in children and young female adults 115-117, 119. Recently, it has been shown that around 20-25% of adult women are affected by symptoms compatible with PFD but in this study a relation with UTI was not
183
The possible role of pelvic floor dysfunction in the pathophysiology of urinary tract infection.
figure 3
evaluated 120. To unravel the role of PFD in UTI, we evaluated the pelvic floor function of adults by a validated questionnaire obtained 30 days after they presented with febrile UTI 121, 122. The results of this are described in Chapter 8 and Chapter 9 123. In a case-control study comparing patients with febrile UTI to healthy individuals without febrile UTI, we found the prevalence of PFD to be 21%
and 23%, respectively. In this study, PFD was not a risk factor for febrile UTI. Furthermore, PFD was not related with previous UTI or bacteriuria. In another nested case-control study, comparing febrile UTI patients with PFD to febrile UTI patients without PFD, we found neither relation of PFD with a history of recurrent UTI nor with the outcome of febrile UTI with respect to presence of bacteremia, fever duration and presence of bacteriuria during 30-day follow-up.
Based on these studies we conclude that, though PFD is common among adults, a pathophysi- ologic role of PFD in UTI is questionable. This contradicts the general believe that PFD is a consid- erable cause of (recurrent) UTI in adults. This may have implications for future research on PFD and UTIs; in particular with respect to specific PFD treatment, like biofeedback physiotherapy, for the prevention of UTI as this seems rather controversial 118.
Factors enhancing susceptibility
Pelvic floor dysfunction?
Factors enhancing exposure and transmission
Factors enhancing bladder invasion
Pelvic floor dysfunction?
Factors enhancing bacterial growth and/or affecting
immune response
Pelvic floor dysfunction?
Susceptible Host
Periurethral colonization (E. coli)
Asymptomatic bacteriuria
Symptomatic UTI Immunity
Host response Bacterial virulence characteristics
184
Part III Complicated cases of urinary tract infection
Part III discusses complicated cases of UTI.
In Chapter 10 several patients with complicated UTI related to intermittent bladder catherization are described. After many antibiotic treatments, these patients with neurogenic bladder developed recurrent UTIs with a multiresistant E. coli leaving very limited antimicrobial treatment options.
Finally, treatment with intravesical gentamicin was successfully applied. Additionaly, a systematic review on intravesical treatment with aminoglycosides for UTI was performed. Based on the re- sults, it can be concluded that intravesical gentamicin is a reasonable treatment option in selected patients practicing intermittent catherization who suffer difficult to treat recurrent UTIs. However, as studies on this topic are rather limited, further studies are warranted.
Chapter 11 describes a patient who developed a fungus ball with Candida spp. of the bladder after uterine artery embolization 124. We hypothesize that ischemic necrosis of the bladder wall provided a niche for Candida outgrowth. Thus this report can be considered a word of warning to gynaecolo- gists that uterine artery bladder embolization might be complicated by complicated fungal UTI.
Finally, Chapter 12, describes a patient with recurrent bacteremic UTI with Enterococcus faecalis based on underlying chronic bacterial prostatitis 125. As the preferred antibitiotics to treat Enterococcus spp.
poorly penetrate the prostatic gland, treatment options of chronic bacterial prostatitis with Entero- cocci are very limited 11, 126. This patient was successfully treated with moxifloxacin and thus it might be a reasonable treatment option for chronic bacterial prostatitis with susceptible Enterococci.
References
1. Peleg AY, MacLaren G, Hoy J. Acute pyelonephritis: management steps that remain unresolved. Clin Infect Dis 2007; 45(9):1249.
2. Nicolle LE. Complicated pyelonephritis: unresolved issues. Curr Infect Dis Rep 2007; 9(6):501-507.
3. van Haaren KAM, Visser HS, van Vliet S et al. NHG-Standaard Urineweginfecties: tweede herziening [Guideline of the Dutch College of General Practitioners on urinary tract infections: second revision].
Huisarts Wet 2005; 48:341-352.
4. Nijs S, Bartelds AIM, Stobberingh EE. Acute ongecompliceerde urineweginfecties: antibiotische therapie en antibioticumresistentie. Infectieziekten Bulletin 2005; 16(8):291-295.
5. Verheij RA, Jabaaij L, Abrahamse H, van den Hoogen H, Braspenning J, van Althuis T. Feiten en cijfers over huisartsenzorg in Nederland. Utrecht: Landelijk Informatienetwerk Huisartsenzorg 2004.
185
6. Koeijers JJ, Verbon A, Kessels AG et al. Urinary tract infection in male general practice patients: uropathogens and antibiotic susceptibility. Urology 2010; 76(2):336-340.
7. den Heijer CD, Donker GA, Maes J, Stobberingh EE. Antibiotic susceptibility of unselected uropathogenic Escherichia coli from female Dutch general practice patients: a comparison of two surveys with a 5 year interval.
J Antimicrob Chemother 2010; 65(10):2128-2133.
8. Bleidorn J, Gagyor I, Kochen MM, Wegscheider K, Hummers-Pradier E. Symptomatic treatment (ibuprofen) or antibiotics (ciprofloxacin) for uncomplicated urinary tract infection? - results of a randomized controlled pilot trial. BMC Med 2010;8:30.
9. Pinson AG, Philbrick JT, Lindbeck GH, Schorling JB. Fever in the clinical diagnosis of acute pyelonephritis. Am J Emerg Med 1997; 15(2):148-151.
10. Piccoli GB, Consiglio V, Colla L et al. Antibiotic treatment for acute ‘uncomplicated’ or ‘primary’
pyelonephritis: a systematic, ‘semantic revision’. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2006; 28 Suppl 1:S49-S63.
11. Lipsky BA, Byren I, Hoey CT. Treatment of bacterial prostatitis. Clin Infect Dis 2010; 50(12):1641-1652.
12. McCabe WR, Jackson GG. Gram-Negative Bacteremia: II. Clinical, Laboratory, and Therapeutic Observations.
Arch Intern Med 1962; 110(6):856-864.
13. Jackson GG, Rana-Sialer JA, Grieble HG, McCabe WR. Profiles of pyelonephritis. Arch Intern Med 1962; 110:63- 75.:63-75.
14. Bates DW, Pruess KE, Lee TH. How bad are bacteremia and sepsis? Outcomes in a cohort with suspected bacteremia. Arch Intern Med 1995; 155(6):593-598.
15. Bone RC, Balk RA, Cerra FB et al. Definitions for sepsis and organ failure and guidelines for the use of innovative therapies in sepsis. The ACCP/SCCM Consensus Conference Committee. American College of Chest Physicians/Society of Critical Care Medicine. Chest 1992; 101(6):1644-1655.
16. Efstathiou SP, Pefanis AV, Tsioulos DI et al. Acute pyelonephritis in adults: prediction of mortality and failure of treatment. Arch Intern Med 2003; 163(10):1206-1212.
17. van Dissel JT, van Langevelde P, Westendorp RG, Kwappenberg K, Frolich M. Anti-inflammatory cytokine profile and mortality in febrile patients. Lancet 1998; 351(9107):950-953.
18. van Langevelde P, Joop K, van Loon J et al. Endotoxin, cytokines, and procalcitonin in febrile patients admitted to the hospital: identification of subjects at high risk of mortality. Clin Infect Dis 2000; 31(6):1343-1348.
19. Brown P, Ki M, Foxman B. Acute pyelonephritis among adults: cost of illness and considerations for the economic evaluation of therapy. Pharmacoeconomics 2005; 23(11):1123-1142.
20. Foxman B, Klemstine KL, Brown PD. Acute pyelonephritis in US hospitals in 1997: hospitalization and in-hospital mortality. Ann Epidemiol 2003; 13(2):144-150.
21. Safrin S, Siegel D, Black D. Pyelonephritis in adult women: inpatient versus outpatient therapy. Am J Med 1988;
85(6):793-798.
22. Ward G, Jorden RC, Severance HW. Treatment of pyelonephritis in an observation unit. Ann Emerg Med 1991;
20(3):258-261.
23. Israel RS, Lowenstein SR, Marx JA, Koziol-McLain J, Svoboda L, Ranniger S. Management of acute pyelonephritis in an emergency department observation unit. Ann Emerg Med 1991; 20(3):253-257.
24. Pinson AG, Philbrick JT, Lindbeck GH, Schorling JB. ED management of acute pyelonephritis in women:
a cohort study. Am J Emerg Med 1994; 12(3):271-278.
186
25. Elkharrat D, Chastang C, Boudiaf M, Le Corre A, Raskine L, Caulin C. Relevance in the emergency department of a decisional algorithm for outpatient care of women with acute pyelonephritis. Eur J Emerg Med 1999; 6(1):15-20.
26. Mombelli G, Pezzoli R, Pinoja-Lutz G, Monotti R, Marone C, Franciolli M. Oral vs intravenous ciprofloxacin in the initial empirical management of severe pyelonephritis or complicated urinary tract infections: a prospective randomized clinical trial. Arch Intern Med 1999; 159(1):53-58.
27. Talan DA, Stamm WE, Hooton TM et al. Comparison of ciprofloxacin (7 days) and trimethoprim-
sulfamethoxazole (14 days) for acute uncomplicated pyelonephritis pyelonephritis in women: a randomized trial. JAMA 2000; 283(12):1583-1590.
28. Klausner HA, Brown P, Peterson J et al. A trial of levofloxacin 750 mg once daily for 5 days versus ciprofloxacin 400 mg and/or 500 mg twice daily for 10 days in the treatment of acute pyelonephritis. Curr Med Res Opin 2007; 23(11):2637-2645.
29. Warren JW, Abrutyn E, Hebel JR, Johnson JR, Schaeffer AJ, Stamm WE. Guidelines for antimicrobial treatment of uncomplicated acute bacterial cystitis and acute pyelonephritis in women. Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA). Clin Infect Dis 1999; 29(4):745-758.
30. Hooton TM. The current management strategies for community-acquired urinary tract infection. Infect Dis Clin North Am 2003; 17(2):303-332.
31. Grabe M., Bishop MC, Bjerklund-Johansen T.E. et al. Guideline on urological infections. European Association of Urology. Accessed at www.uroweb.org/nc/professional-resources/guidelines/online on 21 April 2009.
32. Ramakrishnan K, Scheid DC. Diagnosis and management of acute pyelonephritis in adults. Am Fam Physician 2005; 71(5):933-942.
33. Acute pyelonephritis. NHS Clinical Knowledge Summaries. Accessed at www.cks.nhs.uk/pyelonephritis_acute on 7 October 2009.
34. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 91: Treatment of urinary tract infections in nonpregnant women. Obstet Gynecol 2008; 111(3):785-794.
35. Stolper E, van Royen P, van de Wiel M et al. Consensus on gut feelings in general practice. BMC Fam Pract 2009; 10:66.
36. Stolper E, van Royen P, Dinant GJ. The ‘sense of alarm’ (‘gut feeling’) in clinical practice. A survey among European general practitioners on recognition and expression. Eur J Gen Pract 2010; 16(2):72-74.
37. van Nieuwkoop C, van’t Wout JW, Spelt IC et al. Prospective cohort study of acute pyelonephritis in adults:
Safety of triage towards home based oral antimicrobial treatment. J Infect 2010; 60(2):114-121.
38. Hoogendoorn M, van ’t Wout JW, Schijf V, van Dissel JT. [Predictive value of chills in patients presenting with fever to urgent care department]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 2002; 146(3):116-120.
39. van Dissel JT, Numan SC, Van’t Wout JW. Chills in ‘early sepsis’: good for you? J Intern Med 2005; 257(5):469-472.
40. Fine MJ, Auble TE, Yealy DM et al. A prediction rule to identify low-risk patients with community-acquired pneumonia. N Engl J Med 1997; 336(4):243-250.
41. Lim WS, van der Eerden MM, Laing R et al. Defining community acquired pneumonia severity on presentation to hospital: an international derivation and validation study. Thorax 2003; 58(5):377-382.
42. Bauer TT, Ewig S, Marre R, Suttorp N, Welte T. CRB-65 predicts death from community-acquired pneumonia.
J Intern Med 2006; 260(1):93-101.
187
43. Bont J, Hak E, Hoes AW, Macfarlane JT, Verheij TJ. Predicting death in elderly patients with community- acquired pneumonia: a prospective validation study reevaluating the CRB-65 severity assessment tool.
Arch Intern Med 2008; 168(13):1465-1468.
44. McGinn TG, Guyatt GH, Wyer PC, Naylor CD, Stiell IG, Richardson WS. Users’ guides to the medical literature: XXII: how to use articles about clinical decision rules. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group.
JAMA 2000; 284(1):79-84.
45. Foxman B, Brown P. Epidemiology of urinary tract infections: transmission and risk factors, incidence, and costs. Infect Dis Clin North Am 2003; 17(2):227-241.
46. Foxman B. Epidemiology of urinary tract infections: incidence, morbidity, and economic costs. Am J Med 2002;
113 Suppl 1A:5S-13S.
47. Brown CA, Lilford RJ. The stepped wedge trial design: a systematic review. BMC Med Res Methodol 2006; 6:54.
48. Hussey MA, Hughes JP. Design and analysis of stepped wedge cluster randomized trials. Contemp Clin Trials 2007; 28(2):182-191.
49. Papanicolaou N, Pfister RC. Acute renal infections. Radiol Clin North Am 1996; 34(5):965-995.
50. Ulleryd P, Zackrisson B, Aus G, Bergdahl S, Hugosson J, Sandberg T. Selective urological evaluation in men with febrile urinary tract infection. BJU Int 2001; 88(1):15-20.
51. Jeffrey RB, Laing FC, Wing VW, Hoddick W. Sensitivity of sonography in pyonephrosis: a reevaluation.
AJR Am J Roentgenol 1985; 144(1):71-73.
52. Neal DE Jr, Steele R, Sloane B. Ultrasonography in the differentiation of complicated and uncomplicated acute pyelonephritis. Am J Kidney Dis 1990; 16(5):478-480.
53. Boam WD, Miser WF. Acute focal bacterial pyelonephritis. Am Fam Physician 1995; 52(3):919-924.
54. Demertzis J, Menias CO. State of the art: imaging of renal infections. Emerg Radiol 2007; 14(1):13-22.
55. Kanel KT, Kroboth FJ, Schwentker FN, Lecky JW. The intravenous pyelogram in acute pyelonephritis. Arch Intern Med 1988; 148(10):2144-2148.
56. Sobel JD, Kaye D. Urinary tract infection. In: Mandell GL, Bennett JE, Dolin R, editors. Principles and practice of infectious diseases. 7th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier Inc.; 2010; p. 957-985.
57. Wang IK, Chang FR, Yang BY, Lin CL, Huang CC. The use of ultrasonography in evaluating adults with febrile urinary tract infection. Ren Fail 2003; 25(6):981-987.
58. Lipsky BA. Urinary tract infections in men. Epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment. Ann Intern Med 1989; 110(2):138-150.
59. Sandberg T, Stokland E, Brolin I, Lidin-Janson G, Svanborg EC. Selective use of excretory urography in women with acute pyelonephritis. J Urol 1989; 141(6):1290-1294.
60. Craig WD, Wagner BJ, Travis MD. Pyelonephritis: radiologic-pathologic review. Radiographics 2008; 28(1):255-277.
61. Levey AS, Bosch JP, Lewis JB, Greene T, Rogers N, Roth D. A more accurate method to estimate glomerular filtration rate from serum creatinine: a new prediction equation. Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study Group. Ann Intern Med 1999; 130(6):461-470.
62. Grover SA, Komaroff AL, Weisberg M, Cook EF, Goldman L. The characteristics and hospital course of patients admitted for presumed acute pyelonephritis. J Gen Intern Med 1987; 2(1):5-10.
63. Behr MA, Drummond R, Libman MD, Delaney JS, Dylewski JS. Fever duration in hospitalized acute pyelonephritis patients. Am J Med 1996; 101(3):277-280.
188
64. Stunell H, Buckley O, Feeney J, Geoghegan T, Browne RF, Torreggiani WC. Imaging of acute pyelonephritis in the adult. Eur Radiol 2007; 17(7):1820-1828.
65. Jerkeman M, Braconier JH. Bacteremic and non-bacteremic febrile urinary tract infection--a review of 168 hospital-treated patients. Infection 1992; 20(3):143-145.
66. Leibovici L, Greenshtain S, Cohen O, Wysenbeek AJ. Toward improved empiric management of moderate to severe urinary tract infections. Arch Intern Med 1992; 152(12):2481-2486.
67. Hsu CY, Fang HC, Chou KJ, Chen CL, Lee PT, Chung HM. The clinical impact of bacteremia in complicated acute pyelonephritis. Am J Med Sci 2006; 332(4):175-180.
68. Lee A, Mirrett S, Reller LB, Weinstein MP. Detection of bloodstream infections in adults: how many blood cultures are needed? J Clin Microbiol 2007; 45(11):3546-3548.
69. Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Carlet JM et al. Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008. Crit Care Med 2008; 36(1):296-327.
70. McCaig LF, McDonald LC, Cohen AL, Kuehnert MJ. Increasing blood culture use at US hospital emergency department visits, 2001 to 2004. Ann Emerg Med 2007; 50(1):42-8, 48.
71. Gander RM, Byrd L, DeCrescenzo M, Hirany S, Bowen M, Baughman J. Impact of blood cultures drawn by phlebotomy on contamination rates and health care costs in a hospital emergency department. J Clin Microbiol 2009; 47(4):1021-1024.
72. Bahagon Y, Raveh D, Schlesinger Y, Rudensky B, Yinnon AM. Prevalence and predictive features of bacteremic urinary tract infection in emergency department patients. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2007; 26(5):349-352.
73. Jones AE, Fiechtl JF, Brown MD, Ballew JJ, Kline JA. Procalcitonin test in the diagnosis of bacteremia:
a meta-analysis. Ann Emerg Med 2007; 50(1):34-41.
74. van Nieuwkoop C, Bonten TN, van ’t Wout JW et al. Risk factors for bacteremia with uropathogen not cultured from urine in adults with febrile urinary tract infection. Clin Infect Dis 2010; 50(11):e69-e72.
75. McMurray BR, Wrenn KD, Wright SW. Usefulness of blood cultures in pyelonephritis. Am J Emerg Med 1997;
15(2):137-140.
76. Velasco M, Martinez JA, Moreno-Martinez A et al. Blood cultures for women with uncomplicated acute pyelonephritis: are they necessary? Clin Infect Dis 2003; 37(8):1127-1130.
77. Chen Y, Nitzan O, Saliba W, Chazan B, Colodner R, Raz R. Are blood cultures necessary in the management of women with complicated pyelonephritis? J Infect 2006; 53(4):235-240.
78. Thanassi M. Utility of urine and blood cultures in pyelonephritis. Acad Emerg Med 1997; 4(8):797-800.
79. Little P, Merriman R, Turner S et al. Presentation, pattern, and natural course of severe symptoms, and role of antibiotics and antibiotic resistance among patients presenting with suspected uncomplicated urinary tract infection in primary care: observational study. BMJ 2010; 340:b5633.
80. Lautenbach E, Metlay JP, Bilker WB, Edelstein PH, Fishman NO. Association between fluoroquinolone resistance and mortality in Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae infections: the role of inadequate empirical antimicrobial therapy. Clin Infect Dis 2005; 41(7):923-929.
81. Degener JE, de Neeling AJ. Consumption of antimicrobial agents and antimicrobial resistance among medically important bacteria in the Netherlands. Nethmap 2009.
82. Wagenlehner FM, Weidner W, Naber KG. Pharmacokinetic characteristics of antimicrobials and optimal treatment of urosepsis. Clin Pharmacokinet 2007; 46(4):291-305.
189
83. Geerlings SE, van den Broek PJ, van Haarst EP et al. [Optimisation of the antibiotic policy in the Netherlands.
X. The SWAB guideline for antimicrobial treatment of complicated urinary tract infections]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 2006; 150(43):2370-2376.
84. Talan DA, Krishnadasan A, Abrahamian FM, Stamm WE, Moran GJ. Prevalence and risk factor analysis of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole- and fluoroquinolone-resistant Escherichia coli infection among emergency department patients with pyelonephritis. Clin Infect Dis 2008; 47(9):1150-1158.
85. Arslan H, Azap OK, Ergonul O, Timurkaynak F. Risk factors for ciprofloxacin resistance among Escherichia coli strains isolated from community-acquired urinary tract infections in Turkey. J Antimicrob Chemother 2005; 56(5):914-918.
86. Johnson L, Sabel A, Burman WJ et al. Emergence of fluoroquinolone resistance in outpatient urinary Escherichia coli isolates. Am J Med 2008; 121(10):876-884.
87. Nys S, Terporten PH, Hoogkamp-Korstanje JA, Stobberingh EE. Trends in antimicrobial susceptibility of Escherichia coli isolates from urology services in The Netherlands (1998-2005). J Antimicrob Chemother 2008;
62(1):126-132.
88. Johnson JR, Kuskowski MA, Menard M, Gajewski A, Xercavins M, Garau J. Similarity between human and chicken Escherichia coli isolates in relation to ciprofloxacin resistance status. J Infect Dis 2006; 194(1):71-78.
89. Ramchandani M, Manges AR, Debroy C, Smith SP, Johnson JR, Riley LW. Possible animal origin of human- associated, multidrug-resistant, uropathogenic Escherichia coli. Clin Infect Dis 2005; 40(2):251-257.
90. Johnson JR, Owens K, Gajewski A, Clabots C. Escherichia coli colonization patterns among human household members and pets, with attention to acute urinary tract infection. J Infect Dis 2008; 197(2):218-224.
91. Johnson JR, Miller S, Johnston B, Clabots C, Debroy C. Sharing of Escherichia coli sequence type ST131 and other multidrug-resistant and Urovirulent E. coli strains among dogs and cats within a household.
J Clin Microbiol 2009; 47(11):3721-3725.
92. Thorsteinsdottir TR, Haraldsson G, Fridriksdottir V, Kristinsson KG, Gunnarsson E. Broiler chickens as source of human fluoroquinolone-resistant Escherichia coli, Iceland. Emerg Infect Dis 2010; 16(1):133-135.
93. Vincent C, Boerlin P, Daignault D et al. Food reservoir for Escherichia coli causing urinary tract infections.
Emerg Infect Dis 2010; 16(1):88-95.
94. Hooton TM, Samadpour M. Is acute uncomplicated urinary tract infection a foodborne illness, and are animals the source? Clin Infect Dis 2005; 40(2):258-259.
95. Johnson JR, Clabots C. Sharing of virulent Escherichia coli clones among household members of a woman with acute cystitis. Clin Infect Dis 2006; 43(10):e101-e108.
96. Sannes MR, Belongia EA, Kieke B et al. Predictors of antimicrobial-resistant Escherichia coli in the feces of vegetarians and newly hospitalized adults in Minnesota and Wisconsin. J Infect Dis 2008; 197(3):430-434.
97. Graziani C, Luzzi I, Corro M et al. Phylogenetic background and virulence genotype of ciprofloxacin- susceptible and ciprofloxacin-resistant Escherichia coli strains of human and avian origin. J Infect Dis 2009;
199(8):1209-1217.
98. European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST). Clinical breakpoints. Accessed at www.eucast.org/clinical_breakpoints/ on 1 March 2010.
99. Ena J, Amador C, Martinez C, Ortiz de lT, V. Risk factors for acquisition of urinary tract infections caused by ciprofloxacin resistant Escherichia coli. J Urol 1995; 153(1):117-120.
190
100. Killgore KM, March KL, Guglielmo BJ. Risk factors for community-acquired ciprofloxacin-resistant Escherichia coli urinary tract infection. Ann Pharmacother 2004; 38(7-8):1148-1152.
101. Lin CY, Huang SH, Chen TC, Lu PL, Lin WR, Chen YH. Risk factors of ciprofloxacin resistance in urinary Escherichia coli isolates. J Microbiol Immunol Infect 2008; 41(4):325-331.
102. Colodner R, Kometiani I, Chazan B, Raz R. Risk factors for community-acquired urinary tract infection due to quinolone-resistant E. coli. Infection 2008; 36(1):41-45.
103. Vasquez GA, Siu HR, Luna EM, Reyes KC, Zervos MJ. Risk factors for quinolone-resistant Escherichia coli urinary tract infection. Infect Dis Clin Pract 2009; 17(5):309-313.
104. Chaniotaki S, Giakouppi P, Tzouvelekis LS et al. Quinolone resistance among Escherichia coli strains from community-acquired urinary tract infections in Greece. Clin Microbiol Infect 2004; 10(1):75-78.
105. Rubenstein JN, Schaeffer AJ. Managing complicated urinary tract infections: the urologic view. Infect Dis Clin North Am 2003; 17(2):333-351.
106. Nicolle LE. Short-term therapy for urinary tract infection: success and failure. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2008;
31(Supplement 1):40-45.
107. Sandberg T, Englund G, Lincoln K, Nilsson LG. Randomised double-blind study of norfloxacin and cefadroxil in the treatment of acute pyelonephritis. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1990; 9(5):317-323.
108. Cox CE, Marbury TC, Pittman WG et al. A randomized, double-blind, multicenter comparison of gatifloxacin versus ciprofloxacin in the treatment of complicated urinary tract infection and pyelonephritis. Clin Ther 2002;
24(2):223-236.
109. Naber KG, Bartnicki A, Bischoff W et al. Gatifloxacin 200 mg or 400 mg once daily is as effective as
ciprofloxacin 500 mg twice daily for the treatment of patients with acute pyelonephritis or complicated urinary tract infections. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2004; 23 Suppl 1:S41-53.
110. Talan DA, Klimberg IW, Nicolle LE, Song J, Kowalsky SF, Church DA. Once daily, extended release ciprofloxacin for complicated urinary tract infections and acute uncomplicated pyelonephritis. J Urol 2004; 171(2 Pt 1):734-739.
111. Peterson J, Kaul S, Khashab M, Fisher AC, Kahn JB. A double-blind, randomized comparison of levofloxacin 750 mg once-daily for five days with ciprofloxacin 400/500 mg twice-daily for 10 days for the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections and acute pyelonephritis. Urology 2008; 71(1):17-22.
112. van Nieuwkoop C., Van’t Wout JW, Assendelft WJ et al. Treatment duration of febrile urinary tract infection (FUTIRST trial): a randomized placebo-controlled multicenter trial comparing short (7 days) antibiotic treatment with conventional treatment (14 days). BMC Infect Dis 2009; 19;9:131.
113. Davis K, Kumar D. Pelvic floor dysfunction: a conceptual framework for collaborative patient-centred care.
J Adv Nurs 2003; 43(6):555-568.
114. Finer G, Landau D. Pathogenesis of urinary tract infections with normal female anatomy. Lancet Infect Dis 2004; 4(10):631-635.
115. Carlson KV, Rome S, Nitti VW. Dysfunctional voiding in women. J Urol 2001; 165(1):143-147.
116. Groutz A, Blaivas JG, Pies C, Sassone AM. Learned voiding dysfunction (non-neurogenic, neurogenic bladder) among adults. Neurourol Urodyn 2001; 20(3):259-268.
117. Minardi D, Parri G, d’Anzeo G, Fabiani A, El AZ, Muzzonigro G. Perineal ultrasound evaluation of dysfunctional voiding in women with recurrent urinary tract infections. J Urol 2008; 179(3):947-951.
191
192
118. Minardi D, d’Anzeo G, Parri G et al. The role of uroflowmetry biofeedback and biofeedback training of the pelvic floor muscles in the treatment of recurrent urinary tract infections in women with dysfunctional voiding: a randomized controlled prospective study. Urology 2010; 75(6): 1299-1304.
119. Akkad T, Pelzer AE, Mitterberger M et al. Influence of intravesical potassium on pelvic floor activity in women with recurrent urinary tract infections: comparative urodynamics might lead to enhanced detection of dysfunctional voiding. BJU Int 2007; 100(5):1071-1074.
120. Nygaard I, Barber MD, Burgio KL et al. Prevalence of symptomatic pelvic floor disorders in US women. JAMA 2008; 300(11):1311-1316.
121. Voorham - van der Zalm PJ, Stiggelbout AM, Aardoom I et al. Development and validation of the pelvic floor inventories Leiden (PelFIs). Neurourol Urodyn 2008; 27(4):301-305.
122. Voorham - van der Zalm PJ, Lycklama à Nijeholt GAB, Elzevier HW, Putter H, Pelger RC. "Diagnostic investigation of the pelvic floor": a helpful tool in the approach in patients with complaints of micturition, defecation, and/or sexual dysfunction. J Sex Med 2008; 5(4):864-871.
123. van Nieuwkoop C, Voorham - van der Zalm PJ, van Laar AM et al. Pelvic floor dysfunction is not a risk factor for febrile urinary tract infection in adults. BJU Int 2010; 105(12):1689-1695.
124. van Nieuwkoop C, Tijsterman JD, van Dissel JT. Gather ye buds: fungus formation of the bladder after complicated cesarean section. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008; 199(2):207-2.
125. van Nieuwkoop C, Visser LG, Groeneveld JH, Kuijper EJ. Chronic bacterial prostatitis and relapsing Enterococcus faecalis bacteremia successfully treated with moxifloxacin. J Infect 2008; 56(2):155-156.
126. Barza M. Anatomical barriers for antimicrobial agents. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1993; 12 Suppl 1:S31-35.
