gms | German Medical Science

GMS Infectious Diseases

Paul-Ehrlich-Gesellschaft für Chemotherapie e.V. (PEG)

ISSN 2195-8831

Calculated parenteral initial treatment of bacterial infections: Infections of the kidneys and the genito-urinary tract

Guideline Calculated parenteral initial therapy

  • corresponding author Reinhard Fünfstück - Klinik für Innere Medizin, Sophien- und Hufeland-Klinikum gGmbH Weimar, Germany
  • Udo Hoyme - Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe St. Georg Klinikum Eisenach, Germany
  • Kurt Naber - Urologische Klinik und Poliklinik, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany
  • Adrian Pilatz - Klinik für Urologie, Kinderurologie und Andrologie, Justus Liebig Universität Giessen, Germany
  • Sören Schubert - Max von Pettenkofer-Institut, Medizinische Fakultät, Ludwig Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany
  • corresponding author Florian Wagenlehner - Klinik für Urologie, Kinderurologie und Andrologie, Justus Liebig Universität Giessen, Germany

GMS Infect Dis 2020;8:Doc12

doi: 10.3205/id000056, urn:nbn:de:0183-id0000561

This is the English version of the article.
The German version can be found at: http://www.egms.de/de/journals/id/2020-8/id000056.shtml

Published: March 26, 2020

© 2020 Fünfstück et al.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. See license information at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.


Abstract

This is the eighth chapter of the guideline “Calculated initial parenteral treatment of bacterial infections in adults – update 2018” in the 2nd updated version. The German guideline by the Paul-Ehrlich-Gesellschaft für Chemotherapie e.V. (PEG) has been translated to address an international audience.

The chapter deals with the treatment of more severe infections of the kidney and the urogenital tract, including urosepsis. Recommendations for empiric and targeted antibacterial treatment are given.


Indication for initial parenteral antibiotic treatment

For kidney and genito-urinary tract infections, initial (empirical) parenteral antibiotic treatment is usually only required in severe clinical cases with general symptoms, such as nausea and vomiting or suspected sepsis [1]. These are mainly severe forms of uncomplicated or complicated or nosocomial pyelonephritis, acute prostatitis, rarely acute epididymitis with or without orchitis, acute salpingitis-pelvioperitonitis or severe abscessing infections in the kidney and genito-urinary tracts. Occasionally, parenteral treatment must also be initiated empirically if multidrug-resistant agents for which no oral antibiotics are available must be expected and waiting for microbiological test results is not an option, for example because surgery must be performed immediately (e.g. in acute urinary stone obstruction).


General criteria for antibiotic selection

The choice of antibiotics (Table 1 [Tab. 1]) is made in accordance with the expected pathogen spectrum, taking into account pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic aspects. In any case, ensuring sufficient renal elimination of the drug should be considered for the treatment of infections of the urinary tract [2], [3]. In addition, the so-called collateral damage of antibiotics should be considered, which goes beyond the side effects in the individual patient and favors resistance development or the selection of resistant pathogens (see chapter 2 [4], paragraph collateral damage of antibiotics). In addition to antibiotic treatment, appropriate general as well as subject-specific therapeutic measures are to be taken but these are not the subject of this article [5], [6], [7].


Acute uncomplicated pyelonephritis

The most common pathogen is Escherichia coli, followed by Proteus mirabilis and Klebsiella pneumoniae [8], [9], [10]. Rarely, other Enterobacteriaceae are detected in the urine. Larger epidemiological studies on pathogen sensitivity are missing. However, studies on uncomplicated cystitis can be used because it has approximately the same pathogen spectrum although Staphylococcus saprophyticus occurs less frequently and the resistance situation is roughly the same [11]. Renal parenchymal damage may possibly be prevented by initiating effective treatment in time. Initial (empirical) parenteral treatment with a group 3a cephalosporin, an aminopenicillin/beta-lactamase inhibitor (BLI), an aminoglycoside (not a first choice due to the risk of side effects, always in combination with other antibiotics) is indicated whenever severe general symptoms with nausea and vomiting are present [1], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17]. Fluoroquinolones with high renal excretion, such as ciprofloxacin or levofloxacin may be given if fluoroquinolone resistance is unlikely. After the symptoms improve, oral treatment should replace parenteral treatment in line with the test results as soon as possible. This should be a suitable oral fluoroquinolone, for example ciprofloxacin or levofloxacin, an oral cephalosporin of group 3 (cefpodoxime), an aminopenicillin in combination with a BLI or cotrimoxazole or trimethoprim; but only if the pathogen has been tested as sensitive [1], [18], [19], [20]. The duration of treatment is based on the clinical progression, usually 7 days are sufficient [21].


Complicated or nosocomial urinary tract infection

Definition

A complicated urinary tract infection (UTI) is defined as an infection of the urinary tract that is associated with a morphological, functional or metabolic anomaly, which leads to disturbance of renal function, impaired urinary transport and disorder of local and systemic defense mechanisms [5], [22], [23], [24]. The risk factors are classified in the so-called ORENUC classification [25].

Indication for initial parenteral antibiotic treatment

The indication for initial parenteral antibiotic treatment, as mentioned above, depends on the general condition and the risk profile of the patient. CRP and procalcitonin can be used as biomarkers in the decision making process [26]. Antibiotic treatment of complicated UTIs can only achieve a cure if the complicating or triggering factors are eliminated or improved [1].

Pathogen spectrum

The expected pathogen spectrum is generally much broader than that of uncomplicated UTIs and is also related to the circumstances in which a complicated UTI was acquired [22], [23], [27]. So, the pathogen spectrum in community-acquired first-time complicated UTIs, for instance as a result of acute calcium oxalate urinary stones in a patient with no prior antibiotic and no urinary diversion, is relatively similar to the spectrum of an uncomplicated acute pyelonephritis [6]. But in cases of nosocomially acquired complicated UTIs, pathogens which are not usually pathogens of primary urinary tract infections but appear secondarily as a result of selection or colonization should also be expected. These may be Pseudomonas aeruginosa or Enterobacteriaceae like Escherichia coli [23], [27]. If a complicated UTI is suspected, a urine culture prior to the initiation of antibiotic treatment is generally indicated because the pathogen spectrum is broad and the resistance situation not always predictable, so options for adapting treatment following the microbiological test result should be considered [1].

Antibiotic selection

The initial empirical antibiotic treatment must take into account the regional resistance situation of the expected pathogen spectrum [23]. The following clinical conditions which have an impact on the expected pathogen spectrum and pathogen sensitivity must always be clarified in advance [23]:

1.
Where was the UTI acquired, for instance as an out-patient, in a nursing home, hospital, after diagnostic/therapeutic interventions?
2.
Was there prior antibiotic treatment (for how long, what antibiotics)?
3.
Was there a previous longer hospital stay?
4.
Was there a previous urinary diversion (what, how long, treated how)?
5.
If urinary diversion is present, check the quality of the urinary drainage and, if necessary, change the catheter (removal of the infectious biofilm)
6.
Is it a case of recurrence or treatment failure?
7.
For antimicrobial stewardship reasons, consideration should always be given to the extent to which the use of broad spectrum antibiotics is necessary (such as cephalosporins/BLI, carbapenems).

For initial parenteral treatment of complicated complex UTI, cephalosporins of group 3a, fluoroquinolones and aminopenicillins/BLI are suitable. In the case of risk factors for multidrug-resistant pathogens (such as extended spectrum beta-lactamase [ESBL]-producing Enterobacteriaceae), antibiotics such as cephalosporins/BLI (ceftolozane/tazobactam, ceftazidime/avibactam) or a carbapenem of group 2 (ertapenem) may be used [1], [8], [9], [10], [12], [13], [14], [15]. Patients with nosocomially acquired or catheter-associated UTIs also show an increased incidence of multidrug-resistant pathogens [23], [24], [27], [28]. An antibiotic which is also effective against more rare and multi-resistant Gram-negative pathogens should therefore be used for empirical treatment. These include cephalosporins of group 3b, the cephalosporin/BLI combinations ceftolozane/tazobactam and ceftazidime/avibactam, or 4 (cefepime), fluoroquinolones of group 2 or 3 (observe local Escherichia coli resistances) and carbapenems of group 1 (imipenem, meropenem) [1], [9], [29], [30]. To close the enterococcal gap present in these antibiotics as mixed infections with enterococci are more common in catheter-associated urinary tract infections, acylaminopenicillin/BLI (such as piperacillin/Tazobatam) should be used [1], [31]. If multidrug-resistant pathogens are suspected (in the context of outbreaks or high endemic resistance rates), appropriately effective substances should be used in empirical treatment. Since carbapenemases rarely occur in German-speaking countries, a cephalosporin/BLI (ceftolozane/tazobactam, ceftazidime/avibactam) [8], [9], [10], a carbapenem of group 2 (ertapenem) or, in case of simultaneous suspected Pseudomonas, a cephalosporin/BLI (ceftolozane/tazobactam, ceftazidime/avibactam) or a carbapenem of group 1 (imipenem, meropenem) [1], [8], [9], [10], [29], [30] are suitable. In order to conserve carbapenems and thus counteract the selection of carbapenem-resistant pathogens, the new cephalosporin/BLI combinations (ceftolozane/tazobactam, ceftazidime/avibactam) are also suitable for parenteral initial treatment [8], [9]. For ESBL-producing pathogens, fosfomycin might also be considered for parenteral initial treatment; however, there is limited data on fosfomycin monotherapy in complicated UTIs [32], [33]. For the treatment of infections with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) several highly-effective substances are now available, such as ceftobiprole (effective only against Staphylococcus aureus and some strains of Enterococcus faecalis), daptomycin (effective only against enterococci in high, unauthorized doses) or linezolid [2], [34], [35]. For urinary tract infections, however, there are insufficient studies, so that case-by-case decisions on treatment are necessary.

Patients with diabetes mellitus

Urinary tract infections in patients with diabetes mellitus are problematic because they can increase the pathogenetically significant insulin resistance and worsen an unstable metabolic situation by activating inflammatory processes. This is especially true for patients with a HbA1c value >8.5% (HbA1c – IDFF >70 mmol/l) with a tendency to hypo- and hyperglycaemia, for patients with a BMI >30 kg/m2 and for cases with a manifest diabetic nephropathy (from stage 2b, albumin excretion ≥200 mg/l, creatinine clearance ≤60 ml/min) [36]. Glucosuria promotes colonization of the urinary tract by pathogenic and facultative pathogenic microorganisms.

In case of asymptomatic bacteriuria, no antimicrobial treatment is necessary in a stable diabetic metabolic situation and if obstructive disorders and other anatomical changes have been excluded [37], [38]. For both uncomplicated and complicated infections, the same treatment recommendations are applicable for patients with or withour diabetes mellitus. This is true for the initial parenteral as well as the oral follolw-up treatment. It should be noted that antimicrobial chemotherapeutic agents may increase the hypoglycemic effect of oral anti-diabetic drugs; however other interactions between antibiotics and anti-diabetic drugs are rare.

Patients with impaired renal function and after kidney transplantation

Urinary tract infections favor the progression of acute and chronic renal failure. In patients with renal impairment, dialysis or renal transplantation, no potentially nephrotoxic antibiotics should be used, such as aminoglycosides or vancomycin. The dosage of antibiotics depends on the degree of renal impairment. Dosage recommendations can be found in nomograms or tables with detailed breakdowns [39], [40], [41] as pharmacokinetic parameters of the antimicrobial substances depend extensively on different excretion modes of each substance and the respective renal function (see corresponding tables) [39], [40], [41], [42], [43], [44], [45], [46], [47].

Under the conditions of renal replacement therapy, pharmacological properties such as the molecular size of the antibiotic, its solubility in water and protein binding and the dialysis procedure influence dosage recommendations. It makes sense to only administer antibiotics after completion of the dialysis (HD, HDF, CVVHD, CVVHDF).


Urosepsis

Urosepsis occurs after hematogenous spread from the infected urinary tract without or following instrumental intervention. Mainly Escherichia coli and other Enterobacteriaceae are found. After urological intervention or in patients with urinary diversion via a catheter, multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas spp., Proteus spp., Serratia spp., Enterobacter spp., enterococci and staphylococci must also be considered (see complicated UTI) [1], [23].

Initial parenteral antibiotic treatment must be initiated immediately (within the first hour) in cases of suspected urosepsis and after prior sampling of urine and blood cultures [48], [49], [50], [51], [52] , group 3 or 4 cephalosporins are the most useful for this [13], [53], [54]. Alternatives are acylaminopenicillin/BLI (such as piperacillin/tazobactam) or cephalosporin/BLI (ceftolozan/tazobactam, ceftazidime/avibactam) or a carbapenem of group 2 (ertapenem) or group 1 (imipenem, meropenem), depending on the circumstances under which urosepsis has occurred (see complicated/nosocomial UTI) [8], [9], [10], [13], [29], [30], [31]. An extension of the antibacterial spectrum can initially be achieved, for example through combination with an aminoglycoside or a fluoroquinolone with high urinary elimination [1]. In general, the highest possible dosage of antibiotics should be chosen [3], [55].

Urosepsis usually involves an obstructive uropathy (for example due to urolithiasis, tumors, benign prostatic hypertrophy or where an abscess-forming infection is present). Therefore, after taking samples (urine, blood) and initiating an appropriate broad-spectrum antibiotic treatment, in addition to necessary intensive care measures in case of sepsis, targeted urological diagnostics must be performed immediately to detect or localize the obstructive uropathy or the abscessing infection. The aim is to eliminate the source as quickly as possible or to circumvent the obstruction with suitable measures (such as a transurethral or suprapubic catheter, ureteral splint or nephrostomy) to allow free urine drainage once more [48], [49], [56], [57].


Acute prostatitis, prostate abscess

Empirical treatment of acute bacterial prostatitis (ABP) is based on the same aspects as those for complicated urinary tract infections [1], [58]. In spontaneously occurring ABP, mainly Escherichia coli and other Enterobacteriaceae are found. In patients with ABP following urological intervention, other Gram-negative pathogens, for example Pseudomonas spp. are commonly found. In these patients, ABP is more often associated with abscess-forming progression; here Klebsiella pneumoniae are again found more frequently [59].

For empirical treatment, the preference is for substances which, in addition to high antibiotic concentrations in the urine, also ensure sufficient concentration in the prostate tissue, prostatic fluid and ejaculate [1]. Initial parenteral antibiotic treatment is only necessary in severe forms of acute bacterial prostatitis with or without abscess formation. The drugs of choice are fluoroquinolones of groups 2 and 3 [58], [59], [60]. However, an antibiotic history is especially important as many patients have previously received fluoroquinolones and the risk of fluoroquinolone-resistant pathogens is high. Alternatively, it is also possible to use groups 3 and 4 cephalosporins or acylaminopenicillins/BLI in an ABP. Since ABP is not a common infection but antibiotic treatment has to be initiated immediately, there are no prospective, controlled or randomized studies, so the treatment recommendations are essentially based on expert opinions [1], [58], [61].

Following in-culture pathogen identification from the urine (prostate massage is contraindicated in ABP) and the results of resistance testing, treatment should be switched to targeted therapy, depending on the improvement of the clinical situation and continued orally for at least two (up to four) weeks, to avoid complications such as acute urinary retention, epididymitis, prostate abscess or chronic prostatitis [1], [58], [61].


Acute epididymitis, epididymoorchitis possibly with abscess

While an etiological age limit of 35 years has traditionally been set (<35 years: sexually transmitted pathogens, >35 years for classical uropathogens) [1], [62], it has recently been shown that classical uropathogens are also common in young patients, and the antimicrobial makeup must therefore be adequately assessed [63], [64].

This means that, with the exception of gonococcal epididymitis, in young men preferably fluoroquinolones with activity against chlamydia (for example levofloxacin), should be used. The combination of ceftriaxone i.m. with doxycycline p.o. is still accepted for sexually transmitted pathogens. In older men, group 2 and 3 fluoroquinolones are also options if out-patient treatment is possible [64].

Generally, parenteral and in-patient treatment is necessary only for severe forms (for example abscess formation), severe comorbidities (for example indwelling catheters) or treatment failures. Note there is an increasing resistance to fluoroquinolones, especially amongst catheter carriers, so that combination therapy makes sense, for example with a group 3a cephalosporin. Once the antibiogram has been created, parenteral treatment should be switched to oral sequential therapy as soon as possible [63].


Endometritis, salpingitis, tubo-ovarian abscess, pelvic peritonitis

A broad spectrum of potential pathogens must be expected for infections of the genitalia of sexually active pre-menopausal women. In addition to sexually transmitted pathogens Neisseria gonorrhoeae and Chlamydia trachomatis, etiologically the vaginal flora and pathogens of bacterial vaginosis must be considered, in rare cases also mycoplasmas and ureaplasmas [65], [66], [67]. With regard to the etiology of ascended infections, with exceptions only laparoscopic samples are diagnostically relevant [68]. Since no single antibiotic is effective against the full spectrum of possible pathogens, no consensus on the treatment of choice has yet been found, especially as a variety of studies with combinations of different substance groups have shown positive results. Unequivocal evaluation of parenteral and oral treatment regimes as well as comparisons of out-patient and in-patient treatment has not been carried out to date, so choosing a treatment must be made on a case-by-case basis according to the severity of the disease, patient acceptance and regional resistance of potential pathogens. After clinical improvement, initial parenteral therapy can be switched to oral sequential therapy with one of the combination partners, usually doxycycline, clindamycin or even a fluoroquinolone [62], [69]. Cephalosporins should be combined primarily with metronidazole to cover anaerobes. Alternatively, fluoroquinolones or aminopenicillins/BLI can be used. Fluoroquinolones of groups 2 and 3 are used, in each case in combination with metronidazole, aminopenicillins/BLI plus doxycycline or a carbapenem of group 2 (ertapenem) [69]. Progress monitoring is always required within 72 hours, even in cases of seemingly uncomplicated infections [62]. In the event of treatment failure, antimicrobial treatment should be adapted quickly in line with the microbiological findings available and, if necessary, surgical intervention should be initiated [65], [66].

In pregnancy, embryotoxic or teratogenic potential of various antibiotic groups should be taken into account if used before the 14th week.

The screening established in Germany for asymptomatic bacteriuria in pregnancy is under discussion once more. A Cochrane analysis based on 14 studies showed a reduction from 21% to 5% for pyelonephritis (RR 0.23, 95% CI: 0.13–0.41), birth weight <2,500 g from 13% to 8.5% (RR 0.66, 95% CI: 0.49–0.89) and not significant premature birth <38 weeks of age from 21% to 13% (RR 0.37, 95% CI: 0.10–1.36) with antibiotic treatment [70]. In contrast, a recently published prospective randomized multi-center study found no difference in the prevalence of lower birth weight and earlier time of birth but did find a difference in relation to pyelonephritis [71]. At 16–22 weeks, however, screening and possibly nitrofurantoin treatment start rather late. A more detailed analysis of newborns did not take place. In principle, as far as obstetrics are concerned, the assumption is that studies looking beyond urinary tract infections are difficult to assess and ethically very problematic or hardly feasible.


Note

This is the eighth chapter of the guideline “Calculated initial parenteral treatment of bacterial infections in adults – update 2018” in the 2nd updated version. The German guideline by the Paul-Ehrlich-Gesellschaft für Chemotherapie e.V. (PEG) has been translated to address an international audience.


Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.


References

1.
Grabe M, Bjerklund-Johansen TE, Bonkat G, Cek M, Naber KG, Pickard R, Tenke P, Wagenlehner F, Wullt B. Guidelines on urological infections. Arnhem, Netherlands: European Association of Urology; 2015. (European Association of Urology Guidelines).
2.
Wagenlehner FM, Pilatz A, Naber KG, Perletti G, Wagenlehner CM, Weidner W. Anti-infective treatment of bacterial urinary tract infections. Curr Med Chem. 2008;15(14):1412-27. DOI: 10.2174/092986708784567699 External link
3.
Pea F, Viale P, Furlanut M. Antimicrobial therapy in critically ill patients: a review of pathophysiological conditions responsible for altered disposition and pharmacokinetic variability. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2005;44(10):1009-34. DOI: 10.2165/00003088-200544100-00002 External link
4.
Kresken M, Grabein B, Becker K, Straube E, Wichelhaus TA, Willinger B. Kalkulierte parenterale Initialtherapie bakterieller Infektionen: Mikrobiologie [Calculated parenteral initial treatment of bacterial infections: Microbiology]. GMS Infect Dis. 2020;8:Doc18. DOI: 10.3205/id000062 External link
5.
Tenke P, Kovacs B, Bjerklund Johansen TE, Matsumoto T, Tambyah PA, Naber KG. European and Asian guidelines on management and prevention of catheter-associated urinary tract infections. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2008 Feb;31 Suppl 1:S68-78. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2007.07.033 External link
6.
Bichler KH, Eipper E, Naber K, Braun V, Zimmermann R, Lahme S. Urinary infection stones. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2002; 19(6):488-98. DOI: 10.1016/S0924-8579(02) 00088-2 External link
7.
Botto H, Naber KG, Bishop MC, Jarlier V. Antibiotic policy in prophylaxis and treatment of nosocomial urinary tract infection. In: Naber KG, Pechere JC, Kumazawa J, Khoury S, editors. Nosocomial and health care associated infections in urology. Plymouth, UK: Plymbridge Distributors; 2001. p. 179-91.
8.
Wagenlehner FM, Sobel JD, Newell P, Armstrong J, Huang X, Stone GG, Yates K, Gasink LB. Ceftazidime-avibactam Versus Doripenem for the Treatment of Complicated Urinary Tract Infections, Including Acute Pyelonephritis: RECAPTURE, a Phase 3 Randomized Trial Program. Clin Infect Dis. 2016 Sep;63(6):754-62. DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciw378 External link
9.
Wagenlehner FM, Umeh O, Steenbergen J, Yuan G, Darouiche RO. Ceftolozane-tazobactam compared with levofloxacin in the treatment of complicated urinary-tract infections, including pyelonephritis: a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial (ASPECT-cUTI). Lancet. 2015 May 16;385(9981):1949-56. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14) 62220-0 External link
10.
Carmeli Y, Armstrong J, Laud PJ, Newell P, Stone G, Wardman A, Gasink LB. Ceftazidime-avibactam or best available therapy in patients with ceftazidime-resistant Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa complicated urinary tract infections or complicated intra-abdominal infections (REPRISE): a randomised, pathogen-directed, phase 3 study. Lancet Infect Dis. 2016; 16(6):661-73. DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(16) 30004-4 External link
11.
Naber KG, Schito G, Botto H, Palou J, Mazzei T. Surveillance study in Europe and Brazil on clinical aspects and Antimicrobial Resistance Epidemiology in Females with Cystitis (ARESC): implications for empiric therapy. Eur Urol. 2008 Nov;54(5):1164-75. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2008.05.010 External link
12.
Bailey RR, Begg EJ, Smith AH, Robson RA, Lynn KL, Chambers ST, Barclay ML, Hornibrook J. Prospective, randomized, controlled study comparing two dosing regimens of gentamicin/oral ciprofloxacin switch therapy for acute pyelonephritis. Clin Nephrol. 1996 Sep;46(3):183-6.
13.
Jimenez-Cruz F, Jasovich A, Cajigas J, Jiang Q, Imbeault D, Woods GL, Gesser RM; Protocol 021 Study Group. A prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blind study comparing ertapenem and ceftriaxone followed by appropriate oral therapy for complicated urinary tract infections in adults. Urology. 2002 Jul;60(1):16-22. DOI: 10.1016/S0090-4295(02) 01664-3 External link
14.
Naber KG, Landen H. Rapid resolution of symptoms with ciprofloxacin therapy in 3859 hospitalised patients with urinary tract infection. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2004 Mar;23 Suppl 1:S35-40. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2003.09.010 External link
15.
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 Jan;71(1):17-22. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2007.09.002 External link
16.
Sturm W. Isepamicin versus amikacin in the treatment of urinary tract infection. J Chemother. 1995 Jun;7 Suppl 2:149-54.
17.
Wie SH, Kim HW, Chang UI. Effects of gentamicin monotherapy for the initial treatment of community-onset complicated non-obstructive acute pyelonephritis due to Enterobacteriaceae in elderly and non-elderly women. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2014 Nov;20(11):1211-8. DOI: 10.1111/1469-0691.12711 External link
18.
Talan DA, Stamm WE, Hooton TM, Moran GJ, Burke T, Iravani A, Reuning-Scherer J, Church DA. Comparison of ciprofloxacin (7 days) and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (14 days) for acute uncomplicated pyelonephritis pyelonephritis in women: a randomized trial. JAMA. 2000 Mar 22-29;283(12):1583-90. DOI: 10.1001/jama.283.12.1583 External link
19.
Richard GA, Klimberg IN, Fowler CL, Callery-D’Amico S, Kim SS. Levofloxacin versus ciprofloxacin versus lomefloxacin in acute pyelonephritis. Urology. 1998 Jul;52(1):51-5. DOI: 10.1016/S0090-4295(98) 00160-5 External link
20.
Naber KG, Hauke W. Cefpodoxime proxetil in patients with acute uncomplicated pyelonephritis. International, prospective, randomized comparative study versus ciprofloxacin in general practice. Chemotherapie J. 2001;10:29-34.
21.
Sandberg T, Skoog G, Hermansson AB, Kahlmeter G, Kuylenstierna N, Lannergård A, Otto G, Settergren B, Ekman GS. Ciprofloxacin for 7 days versus 14 days in women with acute pyelonephritis: a randomised, open-label and double-blind, placebo-controlled, non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2012 Aug 4;380(9840):484-90. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12) 60608-4 External link
22.
Bjerklund Johansen TE, Cek M, Naber K, Stratchounski L, Svendsen MV, Tenke P; PEP and PEAP study investigators; European Society of Infections in Urology. Prevalence of hospital-acquired urinary tract infections in urology departments. Eur Urol. 2007 Apr;51(4):1100-11; discussion 1112. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.08.012 External link
23.
Johansen TE, Cek M, Naber KG, Stratchounski L, Svendsen MV, Tenke P; PEP and PEAP-study investigators; Board of the European Society of Infections in Urology. Hospital acquired urinary tract infections in urology departments: pathogens, susceptibility and use of antibiotics. Data from the PEP and PEAP-studies. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2006 Aug;28 Suppl 1:S91-107. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2006.05.005 External link
24.
Wagenlehner FM, Loibl E, Vogel H, Naber KG. Incidence of nosocomial urinary tract infections on a surgical intensive care unit and implications for management. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2006 Aug;28 Suppl 1:S86-90. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2006.05.011 External link
25.
Johansen TE, Botto H, Cek M, Grabe M, Tenke P, Wagenlehner FM, Naber KG. Critical review of current definitions of urinary tract infections and proposal of an EAU/ESIU classification system. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2011 Dec;38 Suppl:64-70. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2011.09.009 External link
26.
Albrich WC, Harbarth S. Pros and cons of using biomarkers versus clinical decisions in start and stop decisions for antibiotics in the critical care setting. Intensive Care Med. 2015 Oct;41(10):1739-51. DOI: 10.1007/s00134-015-3978-8 External link
27.
Wagenlehner FM, Niemetz AH, Weidner W, Naber KG. Spectrum and antibiotic resistance of uropathogens from hospitalised patients with urinary tract infections: 1994-2005. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2008 Feb;31 Suppl 1:S25-34. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2007.07.029 External link
28.
Wagenlehner FM, Krcmery S, Held C, Klare I, Witte W, Bauernfeind A, Schneider I, Naber KG. Epidemiological analysis of the spread of pathogens from a urological ward using genotypic, phenotypic and clinical parameters. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2002; 19(6):583-91. DOI: 10.1016/S0924-8579(02) 00093-6 External link
29.
Naber KG, Llorens L, Kaniga K, Kotey P, Hedrich D, Redman R. Intravenous doripenem at 500 milligrams versus levofloxacin at 250 milligrams, with an option to switch to oral therapy, for treatment of complicated lower urinary tract infection and pyelonephritis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2009 Sep;53(9):3782-92. DOI: 10.1128/AAC.00837-08 External link
30.
Wagenlehner FM, Wagenlehner C, Redman R, Weidner W, Naber KG. Urinary bactericidal activity of Doripenem versus that of levofloxacin in patients with complicated urinary tract infections or pyelonephritis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2009 Apr;53(4):1567-73. DOI: 10.1128/AAC.01133-08 External link
31.
Naber KG, Savov O, Salmen HC. Piperacillin 2 g/tazobactam 0.5 g is as effective as imipenem 0.5 g/cilastatin 0.5 g for the treatment of acute uncomplicated pyelonephritis and complicated urinary tract infections. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2002 Feb;19(2):95-103. DOI: 10.1016/S0924-8579(01) 00481-2 External link
32.
Naber KG, Timmler R. Keimelimination durch Fosfomycin bei komplizierten Harnwegsinfektionen. Therapiewoche. 1983;33:3300-6.
33.
Reffert JL, Smith WJ. Fosfomycin for the treatment of resistant gram-negative bacterial infections. Insights from the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists. Pharmacotherapy. 2014 Aug;34(8):845-57. DOI: 10.1002/phar.1434 External link
34.
Wagenlehner FM, Lehn N, Witte W, Naber KG. In vitro activity of daptomycin versus linezolid and vancomycin against gram-positive uropathogens and ampicillin against enterococci, causing complicated urinary tract infections. Chemotherapy. 2005 May;51(2-3):64-9. DOI: 10.1159/000085611 External link
35.
Naber KG, Eisenstein BI, Tally FP. Daptomycin versus ciprofloxacin in the treatment of complicated urinary tract infection due to Gram-positive bacteria. Infect Dis Clin Pract (Baltim Md). 2004;12:322-7. DOI: 10.1097/01.idc.0000144898.12957. External link
36.
Schlosser M, Hasslacher C, Wolf G. Nephropathie bei Diabetes. DDG Praxisempfehlung. Diabetologie. 2017;12 Suppl 2:S115-20.
37.
Ooi ST, Frazee LA, Gardner WG. Management of asymptomatic bacteriuria in patients with diabetes mellitus. Ann Pharmacother. 2004 Mar;38(3):490-3. DOI: 10.1345/aph.1D355 External link
38.
Fünfstück R, Stein G. Asymptomatische Bakteriurie. Nieren- und Hochdruckkrankheiten. 2007;26:269-78. DOI: 10.5414/NHP36269 External link
39.
Fünfstück R, Wagenlehner FM, Olschläger T, Naber KG. Harnwegsinfektionen: Zystitis, Pyelonephritis, Urosepsis [Urinary tract infections: cystitis, pyelonephritis, urosepsis]. Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2012 Feb;137(5):198-201. DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1292886 External link
40.
Fünfstück R, Naber KG, Bishop MC. Harnwegsinfektionen bei Patienten mit einer Niereninsuffizienz und unter Dialysebedingungen. Nieren- und Hochdruckkrankheiten. 2011;40:395-400. DOI: 10.5414/NHX1381 External link
41.
Naber KG, Fünfstück R, Wagenlehner FME. Aktuelle Empfehlungen zur Antibiotikatherapie von Harnwegsinfektionen. Urologie Scan. 2015;2:57-78. DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1391490 External link
42.
Bouvier d’Yvoir MJY, Maire PH. Dosage regimens of antibacterials. Clin Drug Invest. 1996;11:229-39. DOI: 10.2165/00044011-199611040-00006 External link
43.
Schmechel H, Fünfstück R, Folger U, Robiller F, Schmechel R. Kritische Betrachtung der rechnerischen Bestimmung der glomerulären Filtrationsrate nach Cockroft und Gault - Versuch einer Korrektur. Nieren- und Hochdruckkrankheiten. 2005;10:433-44. DOI: 10.5414/NHP34433 External link
44.
Swan SK, Bennett WM. Drug dosing guidelines in patients with renal failure. West J Med. 1992;156(6):633-8.
45.
Stein G, Eichhorn T, Fünfstück R. Harnwegsinfektionen bei Patienten mit eingeschränkter Nierenfunktion. Nieren- und Hochdruckkrankheiten. 2007;36:288-91. DOI: 10.5414/NHP36288 External link
46.
Aronoff G, Brater DC, Schrier R, Bennett WM. Use of drugs in patients with renal insufficiency. Workshop report. Blood Purif. 1994;12(1):14-9. DOI: 10.1159/000170140 External link
47.
Zolk O, Eschenhagen T. Infektionserkrankungen - Medikamentinteraktion in der Antibiotikatherapie. Notfallmedizin. 2003;29:358-63. DOI: 10.1055/s-2003-42565 External link
48.
Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Carlet JM, Bion J, Parker MM, Jaeschke R, Reinhart K, Angus DC, Brun-Buisson C, Beale R, Calandra T, Dhainaut JF, Gerlach H, Harvey M, Marini JJ, Marshall J, Ranieri M, Ramsay G, Sevransky J, Thompson BT, Townsend S, Vender JS, Zimmerman JL, Vincent JL; International Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines Committee; American Association of Critical-Care Nurses; American College of Chest Physicians; American College of Emergency Physicians; Canadian Critical Care Society; European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases; European Society of Intensive Care Medicine; European Respiratory Society; International Sepsis Forum; Japanese Association for Acute Medicine; Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine; Society of Critical Care Medicine; Society of Hospital Medicine; Surgical Infection Society; World Federation of Societies of Intensive and Critical Care Medicine. Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008. Crit Care Med. 2008 Jan;36(1):296-327. DOI: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000298158.12101.41 External link
49.
Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Carlet JM, Bion J, Parker MM, Jaeschke R, Reinhart K, Angus DC, Brun-Buisson C, Beale R, Calandra T, Dhainaut JF, Gerlach H, Harvey M, Marini JJ, Marshall J, Ranieri M, Ramsay G, Sevransky J, Thompson BT, Townsend S, Vender JS, Zimmerman JL, Vincent JL. Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008. Intensive Care Med. 2008 Jan;34(1):17-60. DOI: 10.1007/s00134-007-0934-2 External link
50.
Townsend SR, Schorr C, Levy MM, Dellinger RP. Reducing mortality in severe sepsis: the Surviving Sepsis Campaign. Clin Chest Med. 2008 Dec;29(4):721-33, x. DOI: 10.1016/j.ccm.2008.06.011 External link
51.
Elhanan G, Sarhat M, Raz R. Empiric antibiotic treatment and the misuse of culture results and antibiotic sensitivities in patients with community-acquired bacteraemia due to urinary tract infection. J Infect. 1997 Nov;35(3):283-8. DOI: 10.1016/S0163-4453(97) 93194-7 External link
52.
Kumar A, Roberts D, Wood KE, Light B, Parrillo JE, Sharma S, Suppes R, Feinstein D, Zanotti S, Taiberg L, Gurka D, Kumar A, Cheang M. Duration of hypotension before initiation of effective antimicrobial therapy is the critical determinant of survival in human septic shock. Crit Care Med. 2006; 34(6):1589-96. DOI: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000217961.75225.E9 External link
53.
Giamarellou H. Clinical experience with the fourth generation cephalosporins. J Chemother. 1996 Feb;8 Suppl 2:91-104.
54.
Mandell LA, Bergeron MG, Ronald AR, Vega C, Harding G, Saginur R, Feld R, Duperval R, Landis SJ, Miedzinski LJ. Once-daily therapy with ceftriaxone compared with daily multiple-dose therapy with cefotaxime for serious bacterial infections: a randomized, double-blind study. J Infect Dis. 1989 Sep;160(3):433-41. DOI: 10.1093/infdis/160.3.433 External link
55.
Wagenlehner FM, Weidner W, Naber KG. Pharmacokinetic characteristics of antimicrobials and optimal treatment of urosepsis. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2007;46(4):291-305. DOI: 10.2165/00003088-200746040-00003 External link
56.
Wagenlehner FM, Pilatz A, Naber KG, Weidner W. Therapeutic challenges of urosepsis. Eur J Clin Invest. 2008 Oct;38 Suppl 2:45-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2362.2008.02008.x External link
57.
Wagenlehner FM, Weidner W, Naber KG. Optimal management of urosepsis from the urological perspective. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2007 Nov;30(5):390-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2007.06.027 External link
58.
Wagenlehner FM, Naber KG, Bschleipfer T, Brähler E, Weidner W. Prostatitis and male pelvic pain syndrome: diagnosis and treatment. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2009 Mar;106(11):175-83. DOI: 10.3238/arztebl.2009.0175 External link
59.
Millán-Rodríguez F, Palou J, Bujons-Tur A, Musquera-Felip M, Sevilla-Cecilia C, Serrallach-Orejas M, Baez-Angles C, Villavicencio-Mavrich H. Acute bacterial prostatitis: two different sub-categories according to a previous manipulation of the lower urinary tract. World J Urol. 2006 Feb;24(1):45-50. DOI: 10.1007/s00345-005-0040-4 External link
60.
Wagenlehner FM, Naber KG. Fluoroquinolone Antimicrobial Agents in the Treatment of Prostatitis and Recurrent Urinary Tract Infections in Men. Curr Infect Dis Rep. 2005 Jan;7(1):9-16. DOI: 10.1007/s11908-005-0018-9 External link
61.
Schaeffer AJ, Anderson RU, Krieger JN, Lobel B, Naber KG, Nakagawa M. Consensus statement on prostatitis. The assessment and management of male pelvic pain syndrome, including prostatitis. In: McConnell J, Abrams P, Denis L, Khoury S, Roehrborn C, editors. Male lower urinary tract dysfunction. Evaluation and management. 6th International Conference on New Developments in Prostate Cancer and Prostate Diseases; 2005 Jun 24-27; Paris. Paris: Health Publications; 2006. p. 343-75.
62.
Workowski KA, Berman SM. Sexually transmitted disease treatment guidelines. MMWR Recommendations and Reports. 2006;55:1-94.
63.
Pilatz A, Hossain H, Kaiser R, Mankertz A, Schüttler CG, Domann E, Schuppe HC, Chakraborty T, Weidner W, Wagenlehner F. Acute epididymitis revisited: impact of molecular diagnostics on etiology and contemporary guideline recommendations. Eur Urol. 2015 Sep;68(3):428-35. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.12.005 External link
64.
Eickhoff JH, Frimodt-Møller N, Walter S, Frimodt-Møller C. A double-blind, randomized, controlled multicentre study to compare the efficacy of ciprofloxacin with pivampicillin as oral therapy for epididymitis in men over 40 years of age. BJU Int. 1999 Nov;84(7):827-34.
65.
Hoyme UB. Tuboovarialabszess, Pelveoperitonitis und septischer Schock. Gynäkologe. 2002;4:353-62. DOI: 10.1007/s00129-002-1172-x External link
66.
Livengood III CH. Tubo-ovarian abscess. In: Mead PB, Hager, WD, Faro S, editors. Protocols for infectious diseases in obstetrics and gynecology. Malden: Blackwell Science Inc; 2000. p. 412-8.
67.
Sweet RL. Pelvic Inflammatory Disease: Treatment. In: Mead PB, Hager, WD, Faro S, editors. Protocols for infectious diseases in obstetrics and gynecology. Malden: Blackwell Science Inc; 2000. p. 400-5.
68.
Jacobson L, Weström L. Objectivized diagnosis of acute pelvic inflammatory disease. Diagnostic and prognostic value of routine laparoscopy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1969 Dec 1;105(7):1088-98. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9378(69)90132-X External link
69.
Infektiologische Empfehlungen und Leitlinien zur Diagnostik und Therapie in Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe. München: medifact-publishing; 2002.
70.
Smaill F, Vazquez JC. Antibiotics for asymptomatic bacteriuria in pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Apr 18;(2):CD000490. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000490.pub2 External link
71.
Kazemier BM, Koningstein FN, Schneeberger C, Ott A, Bossuyt PM, de Miranda E, Vogelvang TE, Verhoeven CJ, Langenveld J, Woiski M, Oudijk MA, van der Ven JE, Vlegels MT, Kuiper PN, Feiertag N, Pajkrt E, de Groot CJ, Mol BW, Geerlings SE. Maternal and neonatal consequences of treated and untreated asymptomatic bacteriuria in pregnancy: a prospective cohort study with an embedded randomised controlled trial. Lancet Infect Dis. 2015 Nov;15(11):1324-33. DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(15)00070-5 External link