Welcome to NGC. Skip directly to: Search Box, Navigation, Content.


Complete Summary

GUIDELINE TITLE

Complicated urinary tract infections due to urological disorders. In: Guidelines on the management of urinary and male genital tract infections.

BIBLIOGRAPHIC SOURCE(S)

  • Complicated UTIs due to urological disorders. In: Grabe M, Bishop MC, Bjerklund-Johansen TE, Botto H, Çek M, Lobel B, Naber KG, Palou J, Tenke P. Guidelines on the management of urinary and male genital tract infections. Arnhem, The Netherlands: European Association of Urology (EAU); 2008 Mar. p. 64-9. [25 references]

GUIDELINE STATUS

Note: This guideline has been updated. The National Guideline Clearinghouse (NGC) is working to update this summary.

** REGULATORY ALERT **

FDA WARNING/REGULATORY ALERT

Note from the National Guideline Clearinghouse: This guideline references a drug(s) for which important revised regulatory and/or warning information has been released.

COMPLETE SUMMARY CONTENT

 ** REGULATORY ALERT **
 SCOPE
 METHODOLOGY - including Rating Scheme and Cost Analysis
 RECOMMENDATIONS
 EVIDENCE SUPPORTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS
 BENEFITS/HARMS OF IMPLEMENTING THE GUIDELINE RECOMMENDATIONS
 QUALIFYING STATEMENTS
 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE GUIDELINE
 INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE (IOM) NATIONAL HEALTHCARE QUALITY REPORT CATEGORIES
 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION AND AVAILABILITY
 DISCLAIMER

SCOPE

DISEASE/CONDITION(S)

Urinary tract infections (UTIs) complicated by urological disorders (structural or functional abnormalities of the genitourinary tract)

GUIDELINE CATEGORY

Diagnosis
Management
Treatment

CLINICAL SPECIALTY

Infectious Diseases
Urology

INTENDED USERS

Physician Assistants
Physicians

GUIDELINE OBJECTIVE(S)

  • To assist urologists and physicians from other medical specialties in their daily practice
  • To provide recommendations on the diagnosis and treatment of complicated urinary tract infections due to urological abnormalities

TARGET POPULATION

Patients with urinary tract infections due to urological abnormalities

INTERVENTIONS AND PRACTICES CONSIDERED

Diagnosis

  1. Assessment of clinical symptoms
  2. Urine culture
  3. Assessment of complicating factors (urinary stones, urinary catheter)
  4. Frequency of urine culture

Treatment/Management

  1. Antibiotic therapy (fluoroquinolones, aminopenicillin, beta-lactamase inhibitor [BLI], cephalosporin [group 2, 3a, or 3b], aminoglycoside, piperacillin, carbapenem, combination therapy)
  2. Hospitalization and parenteral antibiotics in severe cases
  3. Correction of urological abnormality, if possible
  4. Duration of treatment

MAJOR OUTCOMES CONSIDERED

  • Cure rate
  • Recurrence or reinfection rate
  • Development of antibiotic resistance rate

METHODOLOGY

METHODS USED TO COLLECT/SELECT EVIDENCE

Hand-searches of Published Literature (Primary Sources)
Searches of Electronic Databases

DESCRIPTION OF METHODS USED TO COLLECT/SELECT THE EVIDENCE

General Search Strategy

Up until 2007, the main strategy was to rely on the guidelines group members' knowledge and expertise on the current literature assuming that all, or almost all, relevant information would be captured.

In updates produced from 2008 onwards, a structured literature search will be performed for all guidelines but this search will be limited to randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses, covering at least the past three years, or up until the date of the latest text update if this exceeds the three-year period. Other excellent sources to include are other high-level evidence, Cochrane review and available high-quality guidelines produced by other expert groups or organizations. If there are no high-level data available, the only option is to include lower-level data. The choice of literature will be guided by the expertise and knowledge of the Guidelines Working Group.

Specific Strategy for This Guideline

For literature review, PubMed was searched for published meta-analyses, which were used as far as available. Otherwise there was a non-structured literature review process by the group members. Each member was responsible for one chapter (reporter).

NUMBER OF SOURCE DOCUMENTS

Not stated

METHODS USED TO ASSESS THE QUALITY AND STRENGTH OF THE EVIDENCE

Weighting According to a Rating Scheme (Scheme Given)

RATING SCHEME FOR THE STRENGTH OF THE EVIDENCE

Levels of Evidence

Ia Evidence obtained from meta-analysis of randomized trials

Ib Evidence obtained from at least one randomized trial

IIa Evidence obtained from at least one well-designed controlled study without randomization

IIb Evidence obtained from at least one other type of well-designed quasi-experimental study

III Evidence obtained from well-designed non-experimental studies, such as comparative studies, correlation studies and case reports

IV Evidence obtained from expert committee reports or opinions or clinical experience of respected authorities

METHODS USED TO ANALYZE THE EVIDENCE

Review of Published Meta-Analyses
Systematic Review

DESCRIPTION OF THE METHODS USED TO ANALYZE THE EVIDENCE

Not stated

METHODS USED TO FORMULATE THE RECOMMENDATIONS

Expert Consensus (Consensus Development Conference)

DESCRIPTION OF METHODS USED TO FORMULATE THE RECOMMENDATIONS

General Methods Used to Formulate the Recommendations

  • The first step in the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines procedure is to define the main topic.
  • The second step is to establish a working group. The working groups comprise about 4-8 members, from several countries. Most of the working group members are academic urologists with a special interest in the topic. Specialists from other medical fields (radiotherapy, oncology, gynaecology, anaesthesiology etc.) are included as full members of the working groups as needed. In general, general practitioners or patient representatives are not part of the working groups. Each member is appointed for a four-year period, renewable once. A chairman leads each group.
  • The third step is to collect and evaluate the underlying evidence from the published literature.
  • The fourth step is to structure and present the information. All main recommendations are summarized in boxes and the strength of the recommendation is clearly marked in three grades (A-C), depending on the evidence source upon which the recommendation is based. Every possible effort is made to make the linkage between the level of evidence and grade of recommendation as transparent as possible.

Specific Methods Used for This Guideline

The members of the Urinary Tract Infection (UTI) Working Group of the European Association of Urologists (EAU) Health Care Office established the first version of these guidelines in several consensus conferences. The members of the current UTI Working Group of the EAU Guidelines Office updated the guidelines in several consensus conferences thereafter. The first draft of each chapter was sent to the committee members asking for comments, which were then considered, discussed and incorporated accordingly.

RATING SCHEME FOR THE STRENGTH OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS

Grades of Recommendation

  1. Based on clinical studies of good quality and consistency addressing the specific recommendations and including at least one randomized trial
  2. Based on well-conducted clinical studies, but without randomized clinical studies
  3. Made despite the absence of directly applicable clinical studies of good quality

COST ANALYSIS

A formal cost analysis was not performed and published cost analyses were not reviewed.

METHOD OF GUIDELINE VALIDATION

Internal Peer Review

DESCRIPTION OF METHOD OF GUIDELINE VALIDATION

RECOMMENDATIONS

MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS

Note: This guideline has been updated. The National Guideline Clearinghouse (NGC) is working to update this summary. The recommendations that follow are based on the previous version of the guideline.

The following is a summary of the recommendations for complicated urinary tract infections due to urological disorders. Refer to the original guideline for more detailed recommendations and discussion.

Levels of evidence (Ia-IV) and grades of recommendation (A-C) are defined at the end of the "Major Recommendations" field.

A complicated urinary tract infection (UTI) is an infection associated with a condition, such as a structural or functional abnormality of the genitourinary tract, or the presence of an underlying disease that interferes with host defence mechanisms, which increase the risks of acquiring infection or of failing therapy.

A broad range of bacteria can cause a complicated UTI. The spectrum is much larger than in uncomplicated UTIs and bacteria are more likely to be resistant to antimicrobials, especially in a treatment-related complicated UTI.

Enterobacteriaceae are the predominant pathogens, with Escherichia coli being the most common pathogen. However, non-fermenters (e.g., Pseudomonas aeruginosa) and Gram-positive cocci (e.g., staphylococci and enterococci) may also play an important role, depending on the underlying conditions.

Treatment strategy depends on the severity of the illness. Treatment encompasses three goals: management of the urological abnormality, antimicrobial therapy (see table below), and supportive care when needed. Hospitalization is often required. To avoid the emergence of resistant strains, therapy should be guided by urine culture whenever possible.

If empirical therapy is necessary, the antibacterial spectrum of the antibiotic agent should include the most relevant pathogens (A). A fluoroquinolone with mainly renal excretion, an aminopenicillin plus a beta-lactam inhibitor (BLI), a Group 2 or 3a cephalosporin or, in the case of parenteral therapy, an aminoglycoside, are recommended alternatives (1bB).

In case of failure of initial therapy, or in case of clinically severe infection, a broader-spectrum antibiotic should be chosen that is also active against Pseudomonas (1bB) (e.g., a fluoroquinolone [if not used for initial therapy], an acylaminopenicillin [piperacillin] plus a BLI, a Group 3b cephalosporin, or a carbapenem, with or without combination with an aminoglycoside) (1bB).

The duration of therapy is usually 7-14 days (1bA), but has sometimes to be prolonged for up to 21 days (1bA).

Until predisposing factors are completely removed, true cure without recurrent infection is usually not possible. Therefore, a urine culture should be carried out 5−9 days after the completion of therapy and also 4−6 weeks later (B).

Table: Antimicrobial Treatment Options for Empiric Therapy

Antibiotics Recommended for Initial Empirical Treatment
  • Fluoroquinolones
  • Aminopenicillin plus a BLI
  • Cephalosporin (Groups 2 or 3a)
  • Aminoglycoside
Antibiotics Recommended for Empirical Treatment in Case of Initial Failure or for Severe Cases
  • Fluoroquinolone (if not used for initial therapy)
  • Ureidopenicillin (piperacillin) plus BLI
  • Cephalosporin (Group 3b)
  • Carbapenem
  • Combination therapy:

    Aminoglycoside + BLI
    Aminoglycoside + fluoroquinolone

Antibiotics Not Recommended for Empirical Treatment
  • Aminopenicillins (e.g., amoxicillin, ampicillin)
  • Trimethoprim-sulphamethoxazole (only if susceptibility of pathogen is known)
  • Fosfomycin trometamol
BLI = beta-lactam inhibitor

Definitions:

Levels of Evidence

Ia Evidence obtained from meta-analysis of randomized trials

Ib Evidence obtained from at least one randomized trial

IIa Evidence obtained from at least one well-designed controlled study without randomization

IIb Evidence obtained from at least one other type of well-designed quasi-experimental study

III Evidence obtained from well-designed non-experimental studies, such as comparative studies, correlation studies and case reports

IV Evidence obtained from expert committee reports or opinions or clinical experience of respected authorities

Grades of Recommendation

  1. Based on clinical studies of good quality and consistency addressing the specific recommendations and including at least one randomized trial
  2. Based on well-conducted clinical studies, but without randomized clinical studies
  3. Made despite the absence of directly applicable clinical studies of good quality

CLINICAL ALGORITHM(S)

None provided

EVIDENCE SUPPORTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS

TYPE OF EVIDENCE SUPPORTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS

The type of supporting evidence is identified and graded for most of the recommendations (see "Major Recommendations" field).

BENEFITS/HARMS OF IMPLEMENTING THE GUIDELINE RECOMMENDATIONS

POTENTIAL BENEFITS

Appropriate diagnosis and management of complicated urinary tract infections (UTIs) due to urological disorders

POTENTIAL HARMS

  • Side effects from treatment
  • Development of antimicrobial resistance

QUALIFYING STATEMENTS

QUALIFYING STATEMENTS

  • The purpose of these texts is not to be proscriptive in the way a clinician should treat a patient but rather to provide access to the best contemporaneous consensus view on the most appropriate management currently available. European Association for Urology (EAU) guidelines are not meant to be legal documents but are produced with the ultimate aim to help urologists with their day-to-day practice.
  • The EAU believe that producing validated best practice in the field of urology is a very powerful and efficient tool in improving patient care. It is, however, the expertise of the clinician which should determine the needs of their patients. Individual patients may require individualized approaches which take into account all circumstances and treatment decisions often have to be made on a case-by-case basis.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE GUIDELINE

DESCRIPTION OF IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY

The European Association of Urology (EAU) Guidelines long version (containing all 19 guidelines) is reprinted annually in one book. Each text is dated. This means that if the latest edition of the book is read, one will know that this is the most updated version available. The same text is also made available on a CD (with hyperlinks to PubMed for most references) and posted on the EAU websites Uroweb and Urosource (www.uroweb.org/professional-resources/guidelines/ & http://www.urosource.com/diseases/).

Condensed pocket versions, containing mainly flow-charts and summaries, are also printed annually. All these publications are distributed free of charge to all (more than 10,000) members of the Association. Abridged versions of the guidelines are published in European Urology as original papers. Furthermore, many important websites list links to the relevant EAU guidelines sections on the association websites and all, or individual, guidelines have been translated to some 15 languages.

IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS

Pocket Guide/Reference Cards

For information about availability, see the "Availability of Companion Documents" and "Patient Resources" fields below.

INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE (IOM) NATIONAL HEALTHCARE QUALITY REPORT CATEGORIES

IOM CARE NEED

Getting Better

IOM DOMAIN

Effectiveness

IDENTIFYING INFORMATION AND AVAILABILITY

BIBLIOGRAPHIC SOURCE(S)

  • Complicated UTIs due to urological disorders. In: Grabe M, Bishop MC, Bjerklund-Johansen TE, Botto H, Çek M, Lobel B, Naber KG, Palou J, Tenke P. Guidelines on the management of urinary and male genital tract infections. Arnhem, The Netherlands: European Association of Urology (EAU); 2008 Mar. p. 64-9. [25 references]

ADAPTATION

Not applicable: The guideline was not adapted from another source.

DATE RELEASED

2008 Mar

GUIDELINE DEVELOPER(S)

European Association of Urology - Medical Specialty Society

SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING

European Association of Urology

GUIDELINE COMMITTEE

Management of Urinary and Male Genital Tract Infections Guidelines Writing Panel

COMPOSITION OF GROUP THAT AUTHORED THE GUIDELINE

Panel Members: M. Grabe (Chairman); M.C. Bishop; T.E. Bjerklund-Johansen; H. Botto; M. Çek; B. Lobel; K.G. Naber; J. Palou; P. Tenke

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURES/CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

All members of the Management of Urinary and Male Genital Tract Infections guidelines writing panel have provided disclosure statements of all relationships which they have and which may be perceived as a potential source of conflict of interest. This information is kept on file in the European Association of Urology Central Office database. This guidelines document was developed with the financial support of the European Association of Urology (EAU). No external sources of funding and support have been involved. The EAU is a non-profit organisation and funding is limited to administrative assistance, travel, and meeting expenses. No honoraria or other reimbursements have been provided.

GUIDELINE STATUS

Note: This guideline has been updated. The National Guideline Clearinghouse (NGC) is working to update this summary.

GUIDELINE AVAILABILITY

Electronic copies of the updated guideline: Available in Portable Document Format (PDF) from the European Association of Urology Web site.

Print copies: Available from the European Association of Urology, PO Box 30016, NL-6803, AA ARNHEM, The Netherlands.

AVAILABILITY OF COMPANION DOCUMENTS

The following are available:

  • EAU guidelines office template. Arnhem, The Netherlands: European Association of Urology (EAU); 2007. 4 p.
  • The European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines methodology: a critical evaluation. Arnhem, The Netherlands: European Association of Urology (EAU); 18 p.

The following is also available:

  • Management of urinary and male genital tract infections. 2008, Ultra short pocket guidelines. Arnhem, The Netherlands: European Association of Urology (EAU); 2008 Mar. 17 p.

Print copies: Available from the European Association of Urology, PO Box 30016, NL-6803, AA ARNHEM, The Netherlands.

PATIENT RESOURCES

None available

NGC STATUS

This NGC summary was completed by ECRI Institute on September 8, 2008. The information was verified by the guideline developer on December 8, 2008.

COPYRIGHT STATEMENT

This summary is based on the original guideline, which is subject to the guideline developer's copyright restrictions.

Downloads are restricted to one download and print per user, no commercial usage or dissemination by third parties is allowed.

DISCLAIMER

NGC DISCLAIMER

The National Guideline Clearinghouse™ (NGC) does not develop, produce, approve, or endorse the guidelines represented on this site.

All guidelines summarized by NGC and hosted on our site are produced under the auspices of medical specialty societies, relevant professional associations, public or private organizations, other government agencies, health care organizations or plans, and similar entities.

Guidelines represented on the NGC Web site are submitted by guideline developers, and are screened solely to determine that they meet the NGC Inclusion Criteria which may be found at http://www.guideline.gov/about/inclusion.aspx .

NGC, AHRQ, and its contractor ECRI Institute make no warranties concerning the content or clinical efficacy or effectiveness of the clinical practice guidelines and related materials represented on this site. Moreover, the views and opinions of developers or authors of guidelines represented on this site do not necessarily state or reflect those of NGC, AHRQ, or its contractor ECRI Institute, and inclusion or hosting of guidelines in NGC may not be used for advertising or commercial endorsement purposes.

Readers with questions regarding guideline content are directed to contact the guideline developer.


 

 

   
DHHS Logo