Back to all available

Exploring resistance patterns in urinary tract infections among pregnant women: a Saudi Arabian perspective

microbiology
evidence-based-medicine
gynecology-and-obstetrics
womens-health

Abstract

Urinary tract infections (UTIs) can lead to poor maternal and perinatal outcomes. We designed this study to assess the susceptibility patterns of urinary pathogens to antimicrobials, along with their safety for the mother and fetus, to ensure effective UTI treatment during pregnancy. This retrospective study was conducted to assess bacterial UTIs in the inpatient department of a tertiary care teaching hospital in Saudi Arabia. A total of 154 pregnant women with a confirmed case of UTI were included. Urine samples were collected by both urinary catheterization and the midstream urine (MSU) method per the standard procedure. We observed that around 52% of participants were in the 26-35 age group. The most common isolate was Escherichia coli (58.44%), followed by Klebsiella pneumoniae (22.73%) and Streptococcus group B (3.90%). Considering Escherichia coli isolates, nitrofurantoin (49.35%) showed the highest efficacy among participants, followed by piperacillin–tazobactam (40%), trimethoprim–sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMZ-40%), and gentamicin (61%). In prenatal care, it is of the utmost importance to regularly evaluate the susceptibility and resistance pattern of antimicrobials to UTI-related pathogens during the course of pregnancy to provide optimal therapy for both mothers and infants.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.
  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].