The global prevalence of infections in urology study. a long term worldwide surveillance study on urological infections

The Global Prevalence of Infections in Urology (GPIU) study is a worldwide-performed point prevalence study intended to create surveillance data on antibiotic resistance, type of urogenital infections, risk factors and data on antibiotic consumption, specifically in patients at urological departments with healthcare-associated urogenital infections (HAUTI). Investigators registered data through a web-based application (http://gpiu.esiu.org/). Data collection includes the practice and characteristics of the hospital and urology ward. On a certain day in November, each year, all urological patients present in the urological department at 8:00 a.m. are screened for HAUTI encompassing their full hospital course from admission to discharge. Apart from the GPIU main study, several side studies are taking place, dealing with transurethral resection of the prostate, prostate biopsy, as well as urosepsis. The GPIU study has been annually performed since 2003. Eight-hundred fifty-six urology units from 70 countries have participated so far, including 27,542 patients. A proxy for antibiotic consumption is reflected by the application rates used for antibiotic prophylaxis for urological interventions. Resistance rates of most uropathogens against antibiotics were high, especially with a note of multidrug resistance. The severity of HAUTI is also increasing, 25% being urosepsis in recent years. KEYWORDS

Antimicrobial resistance in urosepsis: outcomes from the multinational, multicenter global prevalence of infections in urology (GPIU) study 2003–2013

Primary objective was to identify the (1) relationship of clinical severity of urosepsis with the pathogen spectrum and resistance and (2) appropriateness of using the pathogen spectrum and resistance rates of health-care-associated urinary tract infections (HAUTI) as representative of urosepsis. The secondary objective was to provide an overview of the pathogens and their resistance profile in patients with urosepsis. POPULATION AND METHODS: A point prevalence study carried out in 70 countries (2003-2013). Population studied included; 408 individuals with microbiologically proven urosepsis, 1606 individuals with microbiological proof of HAUTI and 27,542 individuals hospitalised in urology wards. Main outcomes are pathogens and resistance identified in HAUTIs and urosepsis including its clinical severity. A statistical model that included demographic factors (study year, geographical location, hospital setting) was used for analysis. RESULTS: Amongst urology practices, the prevalence of microbiologically proven HAUTI and urosepsis was 5.8 and 1.5 %, respectively. Frequent pathogens in urosepsis were E. coli (43 %), Enterococcus spp. (11 %), P. aeruginosa (10 %) and Klebsiella spp. (10 %). Resistance to commonly prescribed antibiotics was high and rates ranged from 8 % (imipenem) to 62 % (aminopenicillin/β lactamase inhibitors); 45 % of Enterobacteriaceae and 21 % of P. aeruginosa were multidrug-resistant. Resistance rates in urosepsis were higher than in other clinical diagnosis of HAUTI (Likelihood ratio <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: It is not appropriate to use the pathogen spectrum and resistance rates of other HAUTIs as representative of urosepsis to decide on empirical treatment of urosepsis. Resistance rates in urosepsis are high, and precautions should be made to avoid further increas

Erratum to: 36th International Symposium on Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1186/s13054-016-1208-6.]