ReviewCureus2024
Intravesical Therapies for Recurrent Urinary Tract Infections: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Intravesical therapy for recurrent urinary tract infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BJU international · 2026Pooled it
- Catheter-Deliverable Floating Hydrogels for Sustained Intravesical Drug Release.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Evaluation and Analysis of Costs Associated with Prophylaxis of Recurrent Urinary Tract Infections (RUTIs) in Women.Microorganisms · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recurrent urinary tract infections (rUTIs) present a significant clinical challenge, particularly due to the associated overuse of antibiotics and the rise in antimicrobial resistance. This systematic review evaluates the current literature on the use of intravesical therapies as an alternative treatment for rUTIs. Two established primary therapies are reviewed: glycosaminoglycan (GAG) instillations and intravesical antibiotic instillations. Both therapies offer localised treatment, reducing systemic antibiotic exposure and targeting infection sites more directly. A literature search was conducted using PubMed and Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL), yielding 5,963 relevant articles, of which seven studies met the inclusion criteria. The review indicates that both GAG and antibiotic instillations significantly reduce UTI recurrence rates and improve symptoms such as pain and urinary urgency. However, significant variations in treatment schedules and dosages exist, and no direct comparative studies between GAG instillations and intravesical antibiotics were found. Moreover, intravesical antibiotics show great potential in minimising antimicrobial resistance, though further large-scale studies are needed to confirm these findings. While intravesical therapies are generally well-tolerated, GAG instillations can cause mild irritation. Further research is required to optimise therapy regimens and to perform cost-benefit analyses, particularly considering the high costs of these therapies compared to traditional antibiotic prophylaxis. Randomised controlled trials comparing different intravesical treatments are crucial to inform future clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.