Skip to content

Advertisement

  • Research article
  • Open Access
  • Open Peer Review

Risk factors for urinary tract infection in patients with urolithiasis—primary report of a single center cohort

BMC Urology201818:45

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-018-0359-y

  • Received: 15 March 2017
  • Accepted: 3 May 2018
  • Published:
Open Peer Review reports

Abstract

Background

Urinary tract infection (UTI) is very common in patients with urolithiasis, which makes the treatment of urolithiasis complicated, even dangerous. The objective of this study was to determine the risk factors for UTI in patients with urolithiasis.

Methods

Eight hundred six patients with urolithiasis were retrospectively evaluated in the fourth affiliated hospital of China Medical University. All patients admitted to the study were divided into either a UTI infection group or a non-infection group. Sex, age, smoking, stone shape, alcohol consumption, position of stones, and presence of obstruction were used as exposure factors for the cross-sectional study.

Results

One hundred seventy-eight patients (22.0%) had UTI. Through a urine culture test, gram-negative bacilli were the most common pathogen, followed by gram-positive bacilli and fungi.

Conclusions

Sex, age, obstruction, stone shape, and multiple sites of stones could be considered the independent factors for UTI in patients with urolithiasis; smoking and drinking had no statistically significant correlation with the condition. Gram-negative bacilli are the most common pathogen in UTI in patients with urolithiasis.

Keywords

  • Urinary tract infection
  • Risk factors
  • Urolithiasis
  • Urine culture test

Background

Urolithiasis is one of the most common urological diseases, the prevalence of which ranges from 2.0 to 20% throughout the world based on the geographic and socioeconomic characteristics of different populations, and > $2 billion is spent on treatment each year [1, 2]. The prevalence of urolithiasis appears to have increased in recent years for both men and women [3, 4].

Urinary tract infection (UTI) is very common in patients with urolithiasis. Persistent infections caused by urease-producing bacteria will form infection stones consisting of monoammonium urate, struvite (magnesium ammonium phosphate), and/or carbonate apatite [5], which makes the treatment of urolithiasis complicated. Complications from urolithiasis, such as asymptomatic bacteriuria, UTI, and sepsis, have been recognized after treatment with extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy [6]. Patients with severe or multiple stones might develop postoperative systemic inflammatory response syndrome after a percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), with a small percent progressing to urosepsis, which could lead to a catastrophic even, such as septic shock [7]. Of all infections of the urogenital tract, pyelonephritis is the most severe and leads to dangerous complications [5].

Few studies have been published on the risk factors for infection in patients with urolithiasis. In their studies, Schwartz [8] and Wong [9] found catheter, pouches, urinary tract obstructions, neurogenic bladder voiding disruptions, medullary sponge kidney, and distal renal tubular acidosis to be the risk factors for UTI and the development of infection stones. Li [10] and Liu [11] found that of the study patients with urolithiasis, females and those with diabetes mellitus were more prone to septic shock after PCNL treatment. In addition to these factors, there might be some others related to stone formation. For example, smoking, alcohol consumption [12], and other patient characteristics might influence UTI in patients with urolithiasis. The primary aim of our retrospective cross-sectional study was to analyze the risk factors for UTI in patients with urolithiasis; therefore, we chose sex, age, smoking, alcohol consumption, position of stones, presence of obstruction, and stone shape (whether staghorn stones) as risk factors.

Methods

Patients

In our study, data on all patients with urolithiasis were collected from September 2006 to February 2009 in the Fourth Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University. All the experiments were performed in accordance with the guiding principle of Fourth Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University Human Ethics Committee and were approved by the Human Care Committee of the Fourth Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University. Exclusion criteria were antibiotic usage within the previous 3 d; urinary tract instrumentation; and cardiac, renal, or hepatic failure.

Methods

Ultrasound, X-ray, CT, and intravenous pyelography were used to diagnose and classify the position of the stones, presence of an obstruction, and stone shape (whether staghorn stones) in the radiology department, and a routine urinalysis and urine culture test were performed to diagnose a UTI. UTI was defined as presenting one of the following signs or symptoms: fever of > 37.8 °C with dysuria, frequent urination, urgent urination, and/or suprapubic pain with growth of > 105 colony-forming units (CFUs)/mL from a properly collected midstream “clean-catch” urine sample [13].

Subjects were defined as alcohol drinkers and/or cigarette smokers if they had regularly consumed any alcoholic beverage one or more times per week or had smoked 10 or more cigarettes per week for at least 6.0 months [14].

All patients included in our study were divided into either a UTI infection group or a non-infection group. Sex, age, smoking, alcohol consumption, position of stones, presence of obstruction, and stone shape (whether staghorn stones) were used as risk factors in our study.

Statistical analyses

All analyses were performed using SPSS version 15.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). All data are reported as the mean ± SD. Univariate analyses were performed using Student’s t-test for parametric variables and the Kruskal–Wallis test for nonparametric variables to detect influencing factors for UTI. The chi-squared test and Fisher’s exact test were used for comparing ratios. A post-hoc statistical analysis was used for comparing 3 subgroups in age group. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Eight hundred six patients were included in our study of whom 178 (22.0%) had UTI. The general results are provided in Table 1. Ureteral calculi were the most common type of condition, followed by renal calculi, bladder stones, and urethral stones.
Table 1

Different locations of urolithiasis

Stone position

Number of cases

%

Renal stone

274

34.00

Ureteral stone

280

34.74

Bladder stone

50

6.20

Urethral stone

11

1.36

Multiple sites

191

23.70

Total

806

100.00

Table 2 shows the results of the urine cultures. Gram-negative bacilli isolates were the most common pathogen, followed by gram-positive bacilli isolates and strains of fungi (93.3 vs 4.5 vs 2.3%, respectively). Among the gram-negative bacilli, Escherichia coli was the most common, followed by Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Proteus mirabilis, and “other” (52.80, 15.16, and 12.35% respectively).
Table 2

Bacterial species and ratio in total

Bacterial species

Isolates count

%

Gram-negative bacteria

166

93.25

Escherichia coli

94

52.80

Pseudomonas aeruginosa

27

15.16

Klebsiella pneumoniae

22

12.35

Proteus mirabilis

7

3.93

 Miscellaneous

16

8.98

Gram-positive bacteria

8

4.49

Fungus

4

2.24

Female patients had a higher rate of infection than male patients (32.0 vs 15.8%, P < 0.001) and patients > 60 years old were more prone to be infected, followed by those < 40 years old and 40–60 years old (31.0 vs 23.0 vs 18.3%, respectively; P = 0.009). Patients with obstructions were more prone to be infected than those without obstructions (26.1 vs 18.2%; P = 0.006). Patients with multiple stones had a higher rate of infection than those with a single stone (41.3 vs 16.0%, P = 0.001). Patients who smoked had a higher rate of infection than those who did not smoke (25.8 vs 20.1%, P = 0.063), but patients who drank alcohol had a lower rate of infection than those who did not drink alcohol (21.8 vs 22.2%, P = 0.906). Patients with staghorn stones had a higher rate of infection than those without staghorn stones (48.4 vs 19.8%, P < 0.001). (see Table 3).
Table 3

Different risk factors for urinary tract infection

Risk Factors

Number

Without Infection

With Infection

χ2

P

N

%

N

%

Sex

     

28.49

<.0001

 Male

492

414

84.15

78

15.85

  

 Female

314

214

68.15

100

31.85

  

Age groupa

     

9.35

0.0093

 <40

252

194

76.98

58

23.02

  

 40-60

409

334

81.66

75

18.34

  

 >60

145

100

69.66

45

31.03

  

Stone site

     

54.06

<.0001

 Single stone

615

516

83.90

99

16.10

  

 Multiple sites

191

112

58.64

79

41.36

  

Obstruction

     

7.38

0.0066

 Yes

394

291

73.86

103

26.14

  

 No

412

337

81.80

75

18.20

  

Staghorn calculi

     

28.06

<.0001

 Staghorn stones

64

33

51.56

31

48.44

  

 Non-Staghorn stones

742

595

80.19

147

19.81

  

Smoking

     

3.44

0.0638

 Yes

279

207

74.19

72

25.81

  

 No

527

421

79.89

106

20.11

  

Alcohol Drinking

     

0.016

0.9006

 Yes

293

229

78.16

64

21.84

  

 No

513

399

77.78

114

22.22

  

aAge group,

<40 versus 40-60,χ2 = 3.08, P = 0.0793;

<40 versus >60, χ2 = 2.12, P = 0.1451;

40-60 versus >60, χ2 = 10.17, P = 0.0014;

Besides, we did separate analysis of patients with staghorn stone in comparison with non-staghorn stone, and we found the results were almost the same. However, there are two differences.

The first difference is that age does not have a statistically significant relationship to UTI in staghorn stone group (P = 0.2150), however, age does have a statistically significant relationship to UTI in non-staghorn stone group (P = 0.0215). (see Tables 4 and 5). We guess the reason may be that the number of patients with staghorn stone is a little small.
Table 4

Different risk factors for urinary tract infection in Staghorn stones

Risk Factors

Number

Without Infection

With Infection

χ2

P

N

%

N

%

Sex

     

37.16

<.0001

 Male

39

32

82.05

7

17.95

  

 Female

25

1

4.00

24

96.00

  

Age group

     

3.07

0.2150

 <40

20

9

45.00

11

55.00

  

 40-60

32

20

62.50

12

37.50

  

 >60

12

4

33.33

8

66.67

  

Smoking

     

0.03

0.8563

 Yes

22

11

50.00

11

50.00

  

 No

42

22

52.38

20

47.62

  

Alcohol Drinking

     

0.35

0.5521

 Yes

23

13

56.52

10

43.48

  

 No

41

20

48.78

21

51.22

  
Table 5

Different risk factors for urinary tract infection in Non-Staghorn stones

Risk Factors

Number

Without Infection

With Infection

χ2

P

N

%

N

%

Sex

     

12.53

0.0004

 Male

453

382

84.33

71

15.67

  

 Female

289

213

73.70

76

26.30

  

Age group

     

7.68

0.0215

 <40

232

185

79.74

47

20.26

  

 40-60

377

314

83.29

63

16.71

  

 >60

133

96

72.18

37

27.82

  

Smoking

     

3.81

0.0509

 Yes

257

196

76.26

61

23.74

  

 No

485

399

82.27

86

17.73

  

Alcohol Drinking

     

0.01

0.9223

 Yes

270

216

80.00

54

20.00

  

 No

472

379

80.30

93

19.70

  
The second difference is that the first three gram-negative bacteria in staghorn stone are Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Klebsiella pneumoniae. However, the first three gram-negative bacteria in non-staghorn stone are Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. (see Tables 6 and 7).
Table 6

Bacterial species and ratio in Staghorn stones

Bacterial species

Isolates count

%

Gram-negative bacteria

31

100.00

Escherichia coli

12

38.70

Pseudomonas aeruginosa

11

35.48

Klebsiella pneumoniae

5

16.12

 Miscellaneous

3

9.67

Table 7

Bacterial species and ratio in Non-Staghorn stones

Bacterial species

Isolates count

%

Gram-negative bacteria

135

91.83

Escherichia coli

82

55.78

Klebsiella pneumoniae

17

11.56

Pseudomonas aeruginosa

16

10.88

Proteus mirabilis

7

4.76

 Miscellaneous

13

8.84

Gram-positive bacteria

8

5.44

Fungus

4

2.72

Through the results of the chi-squared tests, sex, age, obstruction, multiple stones, and stone shape each had a statistically significant relationship to UTI (all P < 0.05); however, this was not true of smoking and alcohol consumption (all P > 0.05).

Discussion

In our retrospective study, the independent effects of risk factors on the development of UTI were investigated. Sex, age, obstructions, stone shape, and multiple sites of stones were found to be the independent risk factors for UTI in patients with urolithiasis, which might be helpful in their treatment.

Previous reports showed that females had a higher rate of infection stones than males [15, 16]. In Li and Liu’s study [10, 11], females with urolithiasis were found to be more prone to septic shock after PCNL treatment. These results were comparable to ours. The reason might be that women have a shorter urethra, which predisposes them to ascending infections. Nearly 10% of women experience infections of the urinary tract within 1.0 year of PCNL treatment, including cystitis and pyelonephritis [17], and as many as 26% of UTIs recur within 6.0 months [18].

In our study, the patients < 40 years old and > 60 years old were more prone to infections than those from 40 to 60 years old. Thomas [16] found that infection stones were most common in each sex at ages from 60 to 69 years compared with that in other age groups, which was nearly the same as indicated from our results. Daudon et al. [15] reported that struvite was especially low in ages 40 to 49 years, but the frequency peak of ammonium urate stones was observed in ages 0 to 9.0 years. Thereafter, the proportion declined rapidly. In our study, patients between the ages of 40 and 60 years showed a low rate of infection compared with that of the other two groups.

It has been proved that urinary tract obstruction is a risk factor for UTI and the development of infection stones urine cannot pass smoothly. In addition, the inflamed narrowing of the ureter or injuries made by stones when moving down the ureter could easily cause infection. In our study, obstructions were confirmed by CT scan and intravenous pyelography, and 26.14% of patients with obstructions were prone infection compared with 18.20% of patients without obstructions, the results of which were the same as those in the previous study [5]. In addition, those with multiple stones are more likely to be infected than those with a single stone, which could be because multiple stones have more of a chance to cause an obstruction, which could easily cause urinary retention after which the chance of UTI increases significantly.

Staghorn calculi are branched stones that occupy a large portion of the collecting system. Typically, they fill the renal pelvis and branch into several or all of the calices. However, there is no consensus regarding the precise definition of staghorn calculus, such as the number of involved calices required to qualify for a staghorn designation. In our study, the term staghorn stone refer to any branched stone occupying more than one portion of the collecting system, ie renal pelvis with one or more caliceal extensions [19]. A staghorn calculus has traditionally been synonymous with infection stones. Typically, UTI with urease-producing bacteria promote the crystallization and formation of branching stones that encompass the renal pelvis and calyces [20]. It was reported that in 59–68% of cases, the majority of infectious constituents were staghorn calculi [21], which suggests that patients with staghorn calculi are more easily infected. In our study, patients with staghorn calculi were also more likely to be infected, which confirmed the results of previous reports.

There was no statistical significant correlation between smoking and/or alcohol consumption and infection, which indicates that smoking and alcohol consumption could not be considered as independent risk factors for UTI in patients with urolithiasis; however, recently, cigarette smoking has been identified as an important risk factor for the development and progression of urolithiasis [12]. Decreasing urinary flow [22] and increasing serum cadmium [23] might be two reasons for urolithiasis that are associated with smoking and alcohol consumption. In healthy subjects, smoking has been found to significantly increase the antidiuretic plasma arginine vasopressin, resulting in a decrease in urinary flow and possibly promoting the development of calcium urolithiasis [12]. Hamano et al. [24] reported that cigarette smokers have a 4.29-fold risk of developing calcium urolithiasis; however, they did not report any correlation between smoking and UTI.

Typically, gram-negative bacteria are the most common pathogen of UTI, among which, E. coli has a high frequency rate [25]. In epidemiology and antimicrobial susceptibility profiles of gram-negative bacteria causing UTIs in the Asia-Pacific region, Lu et al. [26] reported that E. coli, K. pneumoniae, and P. aeruginosa were the three most common species of pathogens found in UTIs. In our study, gram-negative-bacteria were the most common, followed by gram-positive bacteria and fungus. Among the gram-negative-bacteria, E. coli was the most common pathogen following by P. aeruginosa, K .pneumoniae and P. mirabilis.

Our study had a number of limitations. First, we lacked the data on stone composition, which could be useful for analysis of infection stones. Second, we lacked the details of antimicrobial susceptibility testing. Thus, the relationship between stone composition and bacterial colonization received our attention and might be the subject of our next study.

Conclusions

Sex, age, obstruction, multiple sites of stones, and stone shape (whether staghorn stones) could be considered as independent factors for UTI in patients with urolithiasis. Gram-negative bacilli are the most common bacteria found in UTIs in patients with urolithiasis.

Abbreviations

CFUs: 

Colony-Forming Units

PCNL: 

Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy

SD: 

Standard Deviation

UTI: 

Urinary Tract Infection

Declarations

Acknowledgements

We here acknowledge Dr. Li Zizheng for the help of statistical analysis.

Funding

The study was funded by the Fourth Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University, which had no influence over the design of the study, the collection, analysis, interpretation of data and the writing of the manuscript.

Availability of data and materials

Part of the dataset generated and/or analyzed during the current study is included in this published article and its supplementary file. Remaining data is available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Authors’ contributions

SY, XG and XWZ collected the patients’ information. YZL wrote the manuscript and participated in the design of the study, JL performed the statistical analysis. YLL conceived of the study and participated in its design and coordination. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

All the experiments were performed in accordance with the guiding principle of Fourth Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University Human Ethics Committee and were approved by the Human Care Committee of the Fourth Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Urology, Urologic Minimally Invasive Treatment Center in Liaoning Province, The Fourth Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University, No4, Chongshan East Road, Shenyang, 110032, China
(2)
Department of Urology, Sheyang Red Cross Hospital, No4, Chongshan East Road, Huanggu District, Shenyang, 110032, China

References

  1. Pak CY. Kidney stone. Lancet. 1998;351:1797–801.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Pearle M, Calhoun E, Curhan GC. Urological diseases in America project. J Urol. 2005;173:848–57.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Stamatelou KK, Francis ME, Jones CA, Nyberg LM, Curhan GC. Time trends in reported prevalence of kidney stones in the United States: 1976-1994. Kidney Int. 2003;63:1817–23.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Hesse A, Brändle E, Wilbert D, Köhrmann KU, Alken P. Study on the prevalence and incidence of urolithiasis in Germany comparing the years 1979 vs. 2000. Eur Urol. 2003;44:709–13.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bichler KH, Eipper E, Naber K, Braun V, Zimmermann R, Lahme S. Urinary infection stones. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2002;19:488–98.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bierkens AF, Hendrikx AJ, Ezz el Din KE, de la Rosette JJ, Horrevorts A, Doesburg W, Debruyne FM. The value of antibiotic prophylaxis during extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in the prevention of urinary tract infections in patients with urine proven sterile prior to treatment. Eur Urol. 1997;31:30–5.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Korets R, Graversen JA, Kates M, Mues AC, Gupta M. Post-percutaneous nephrolithotomy systemic inflammatory response: a prospective analysis of preoperative urine, renal pel-Vic urine and stone cultures. J Urol. 2011;186:1899–903.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Schwartz BF, Stoller ML. Nonsurgical management of infection-related renal calculi. Urol Clin N Am. 1999;26:765–78.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Wong HY, Riedl CR, Griffith DP. The effect of iontophoresis on bacterial growth in urine. J Urol. 1995;154:1944–7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Li K, Liu C, Zhang X, Liu Y, Wang P. Risk factors for septic shock after mini-percutaneous nephrolithotripsy with holmium laser. Urology. 2013;81:1173–6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Liu C, Zhang X, Liu Y, Wang P. Prevention and treatment of septic shock following mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a single-center retrospective study of 834 cases. World J Urol. 2013;31:1593–7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Liu CC, Huang SP, Wu WJ, Chou YH, Juo SH, Tsai LY, Huang CH, Wu MT. The impact of cigarette smoking, alcohol drinking and betel quid chewing on the risk of calcium urolithiasis. Ann Epidemiol. 2009;19:539–45.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Cope M, Cevallos ME, Cadle RM, Darouiche RO, Musher DM, Trautner BW. Inappropriate treatment of catheter-associated asymptomatic bacteriuria in a tertiary care hospital. Clin Infect Dis. 2009;48:1182–8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Lee CH, Wu DC, Lee JM, Wu IC, Goan YG, Kao EL. Anatomical subsite discrepancy in relation to the impact of the consumption of alcohol, tobacco and betel quid on esophageal cancer. Int J Cancer. 2007;120:1755–62.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Daudon M, Dore J-C, Jungers P. Changes in stone composition according to age and gender of patients: a multivariate epidemiological approach. Urol Res. 2004;32:241–7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Knoll T, Schubert AB, Fahlenkamp D, Leusmann DB, Wendt-Nordahl G, Schubert G. Urolithiasis through the ages: data on more than 200,000 urinary stone analyses. J Urol. 2011;185:1304–11.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Nicolle LE. Uncomplicated urinary tract infection in adults including uncomplicated pyelonephritis. Urol Clin North Am. 2008;35:1–12.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Foxman B. Recurring urinary tract infection: incidence and risk factors. Am J Public Health. 1990;80:331–3.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  19. Preminger GM, Assimos DG, Lingeman JE, Nakada SY, Pearle MS, Wolf JS Jr. AUA guideline on Management of Staghorn Calculi: diagnosis and treatment recommendations. J Urol. 2005;173:1991–2000.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Vargas AD, Bragin SD, Mendez R. Staghorn calculus: its clinical presentation, complications and management. J Urol. 1982;127:860–2.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Preminger GM, Assimos DG, Lingeman JE. Chapter 1: AUA guideline on management of staghorn calculi: diagnosis and treatment recommendations. J Urol. 2005;173:1991–2000.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Mooser V, Burnier M, Nussberger J, Juillerat L, Waeber B, Brunner HR. Effects of smoking and physical exercise on platelet free cytosolic calcium in healthy normotensive volunteers. J Hypertens. 1989;7:211–6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Scott R, Cunningham C, McLelland A, Fell GS, Fitzgerald-Finch OP, McKellar N. The importance of cadmium as a factor in calcified upper urinary tract stone diseaseda prospective 7-year study. Br J Urol. 1982;54:584–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Hamano S, Nakatsu H, Suzuki N, Tomioka S, Tanaka M, Murakami S. Kidney stone disease and risk factors for coronary heart disease. Int J Urol. 2005;12:859–63.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Zhanel GG, DeCorby M, Adam H, Mulvey MR, McCracken M, Lagacé-Wiens P, Nichol KA, Wierzbowski A, Baudry PJ, Tailor F, Karlowsky JA, Walkty A, Schweizer F, Johnson J, Canadian Antimicrobial Resistance Alliance, Hoban DJ. Prevalence of antimicrobial resistance pathogens in Canadian hospitals: results of the Canadian ward surveillance study (CANWARD 2008). Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2010;54:4684–93.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  26. Lu PL, Liu YC, Toh HS, Lee YL, Liu YM, Ho CM, Huang CC, Liu CE, Ko WC, Wang JH, Tang HJ, Yu KW, Chen YS, Chuang YC, Xu Y, Ni Y, Chen YH, Hsueh PR. Epidemiology and antimicrobial susceptibility profiles of gram-negative bacteria causing urinary tract infections in the Asia-Pacific region: 2009-2010 results from the study for monitoring antimicrobial resistance trends (SMART). Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2012;40(S1):S37–43.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright

Advertisement