Users Online: 106
Home Print this page Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Search Browse articles Submit article Ahead of Print Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 


 
Previous article Browse articles Next article 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Adv Biomed Res 2016,  5:108

Comparison of the effect of co-trimoxazole and co-trimoxazole plus ciprofloxacin in urinary tract infection prophylaxis in kidney transplant patients


1 Nosocomial Infection Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
2 Isfahan Kidney Diseases Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
3 Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
4 Department of Infectious Diseases, Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Date of Submission15-Dec-2015
Date of Acceptance30-Jan-2016
Date of Web Publication08-Jun-2016

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Atousa Hakamifard
Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan
Iran
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/2277-9175.183669

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 

Background: Urinary tract infection (UTI) as an important infection in the setting of renal transplantation carries the high mortality and morbidity rate. Thus, the prevention of this infection should receive higher priority. However, bacterial resistance to antibiotics is on the rise, with limited data to guide prophylaxis. The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim (SMZ/TMP) and SMZ/TMP plus ciprofloxacin for prophylaxis of UTI in renal transplant recipients.
Materials and Methods: In a clinical trial study, 50 patients were included and divided into two groups of 25 using block randomization. Patients in Group I received prophylactic SMZ/TMP and those in Group II received ciprofloxacin plus SMZ/TMP. The incidence of UTI in the two groups at 1, 3, and 6 months after transplantation was evaluated. This study was registered in Iranian Registry of Clinical Trial (IRCT number: IRCT 2015120823743N1).
Results: Of the 61 patients older than 18 years at the time of transplantation, 50 were included. UTI was documented in 8 patients (32%) in Group I and 3 (12%) in Group II (P = 0.026). The average time for the development of the first case of infection was the same for both groups (P = 0.241), and it was at its maximum in the 1st month. Urinary infections caused by Escherichia coli, the dominant strain, were the same in both groups (P = 0.673).
Conclusions: Our study shows that the addition of 1 month course of ciprofloxacin lowered the incidence of UTI. More studies are needed to confirm the efficacy of this approach.

Keywords: Ciprofloxacin, co-trimoxazole, kidney transplant, prophylaxis


How to cite this article:
Khorvash F, Mortazavi M, Hakamifard A, Ataei B. Comparison of the effect of co-trimoxazole and co-trimoxazole plus ciprofloxacin in urinary tract infection prophylaxis in kidney transplant patients. Adv Biomed Res 2016;5:108

How to cite this URL:
Khorvash F, Mortazavi M, Hakamifard A, Ataei B. Comparison of the effect of co-trimoxazole and co-trimoxazole plus ciprofloxacin in urinary tract infection prophylaxis in kidney transplant patients. Adv Biomed Res [serial online] 2016 [cited 2022 Aug 10];5:108. Available from: https://www.advbiores.net/text.asp?2016/5/1/108/183669


  Introduction Top


Urinary tract infection (UTI) as a common infection after renal transplantation has remained a major problem. This rate varies from 30% to 79% between different studies, concerning nearly 60% of bacteremia arising from different transplantation zones.[1] This frequently happens in the early stages after surgery. However, diagnosis becomes more difficult when UTI occurs after being grafted. Moreover, diagnosis might be delayed, potentially leading to bacteremia or pyelonephritis. The clinical manifestations are acute cystitis, pyelonephritis, or sepsis. Previous studies reported a daily prevalence rate of 5–10% for kidney transplant patients from the time that the infected catheter was placed.[2] There are several factors contributing to aggravated risk of UTI in renal transplant patients, such as long-term hemodialysis before graft, female, catheterization time, history of UTI before kidney transplantation,[3] vesicoureteral reflux, diabetes mellitus, intraoperative ureteral stents, old age, and being immunosuppressed.[4]

A broad range of pathogens can cause UTI in this setting. The bacteria causing UTI in immunosuppressed patients are similar to those found in non immunosuppressed ones. The most prominent agent is known as  Escherichia More Details coli. Furthermore, Proteusmirabilis and Klebsiellapneumonia are other causes.[2] Any UTI might be detected averagely within 4–7 days.[5],[6]

Ciprofloxacin also plays a key role in the treatment of UTI.[7] Given the above facts, appropriate evaluation and starting prophylaxis appear to curtail the mortality risk. However, bacterial resistance to antibiotics is on the rise, and yet there are diverse guidelines concerning prophylaxis. Among these drugs, co-trimoxazole was selected as the drug of choice since it can be effective in simultaneous Pneumocystisjiroveci pneumonia. Nevertheless, a number of previous studies reported an increase in microbial resistance to this drug. Considering the appropriate coverage on other strains, this drug is an essential part of prophylaxis protocol in transplant patients. Due to limited information for selection of an appropriate antibiotic as well as the varying reports concerning higher resistance of E. coli and other UTI-causing organisms against co-trimoxazole, this study attempted to evaluate the effect of a combined regimen. Ciprofloxacin was the drug of choice in treating of UTI. Previous studies involved this drug in combination with co-trimoxazole leading to a lower risk of this infection. Moreover, literature review suggested that there have been very few studies in Iran focusing on UTI in renal transplant patients treated with combined drugs. In this study, the effect of combination regimen on prophylaxis of UTI in renal transplant patients in Isfahan Transplant Center was evaluated.


  Materials and Methods Top


This study was a clinical trial study that performed in Isfahan, Iran. During 1 year since 2014–2015, kidney transplant patients in Transplant Center of Al-Zahra Hospital of Isfahan were enrolled in this study. The inclusion criteria involved kidney transplant patients with age over 18 years, consent to inclusion, lack of recent urinary infection, and lack of glucose 6 phosphate dehydrogenase. The exclusion criteria were inaccessibility to the patient to determine various causes of urinary infection such as death or migration, concurrent use of other antibiotics in the course of investigation, withdrawal from the study, allergic reaction to medications, and drug intolerance. This study was registered in Iranian Registry of Clinical Trial (IRCT number: IRCT 2015120823743N1).

Considering the confidence level of 95% (Z1 − a/2 = 1.96), power of 80% (Z1 – b = 0.84), prevalence of UTI in kidney transplant patients of 50% (given the lack of similar domestic studies) (P = 0.5), and minimum significant difference between the two groups of 0.4, the sample size required for the study for comparison of two proportions was calculated 24 patients in each group using the sample size estimation formula. For greater certainty, however, a total of 25 patients were enrolled in each group. The convenience sampling method was used in this study, and the patients were alternately distributed in the two groups in a block-randomized manner until achieving the required sample size.

Of the 61 patients older than 18 years at the time of transplantation, 50 were included and divided randomly into two groups of 25 patients. Patients in Group I received prophylactic sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim (SMZ/TMP) and those in Group II received ciprofloxacin plus SMZ/TMP. In Group I, SMZ/TMP was administered with a daily dose of 160/800 mg for 6 months as in standard protocol. In Group II, SMZ/TMP was administered daily for 6 months along with 250 mg ciprofloxacin every 12 h for the first 1 month. The patients were followed at 1, 3, and 6 months after renal transplantation and were treated in case of UTI based on the organism causing the infection.

The criteria for UTI definition included symptoms of cystitis such as dysuria and frequency, or symptoms of pyelonephritis such as fever, tenderness of the transplanted organ, dysuria, and frequency with a positive culture and a colony count of more than 105. The routine maintenance regimens for both groups were the same: Tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and prednisolone. Tacrolimus was administered at the dose which its level in serum reaches to 10–12 ng/ml and with monitoring its level. Prednisolone used for either induction or maintenance and its dosage gradually decreased. Hence, two groups were well-matched. The peri and post-operative prophylactic antibiotics were cefazolin for both groups until the patient's catheterization and hemovac removed.

The patients and their families were taught to contact the researcher as soon as noticing the clinical symptoms to immediately undertake a remedial action. For patients who enrolled the study, demographic data, reason for renal failure, maintenance therapy before transplantation, type of immunosuppressed regimen, incidence of UTI, urinary infection symptoms, and laboratory findings in the course of investigation were recorded through questionnaires. We used SPSS-22 software (IBM SPSS Statistics) for analysis of data. The Chi-square test (to compare the qualitative and nominal data between the two groups) and t-student test (to compare quantitative data between the two groups) were used.


  Results Top


Each of the two groups (Group I: Co-trimoxazole; Group II: Co-trimoxazole plus ciprofloxacin) included 25 patients. There were (36%) 9 females and (64%) 16 males in Group I, and (32%) 8 females and (68%) 17 males in Group II, with the average age of the participants in Group I, 40.32 ± 1.21 years, and that of Group II, 41.08 ± 1.31 years, respectively [Table 1].
Table 1: Baseline demographic

Click here to view


The most frequent reason for kidney graft, and cause of kidney failure, in patients of both groups were diabetes mellitus (DM) and hypertension, with no statistically significant differences between the two groups (60%, 15 patients in Group I, and 72%, 18 in Group II, P = 0.442). Eight patients (32%) in Group I and 3 (12%) in Group II developed UTI during the research according to the definition criteria (P = 0.026). The average time for the development of the first case of these infections was the same for both groups (P = 0.125), and it was at its maximum in the first month. Urinary infections caused by E. coli species were the same in both groups (P = 0.673) and actually, the dominant strain in both groups was that E. coli [Table 2].
Table 2: Results

Click here to view


A higher percentage of patients in Group I (75%) suffered from DM and urinary infection, compared to the Group II.


  Discussion Top


A major cause of hospitalization and morbidity after renal transplantation is infections, particularly UTI.[2],[8],[9] Enteric Gram-negative Bacilli and Enterococcus species are most common,[10] but organisms with resistance have occurred.[11] The incidence is estimated 25% to 45%.[12],[13] SMZ/TMP for prophylaxis is suggested for at least 6 months according to the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes guideline in renal transplant patients and other guidelines.[8],[14] There are several guidelines that show the importance of prophylaxis against UTIs in these patients, but adequate data are limited, and this issue needs more investigations. One of the important infections in this setting is UTI and correlated with increased mortality.[15],[16],[17] In our study, the average time for the development of the first case of infections was the same for both groups, and it was at its maximum in the 1st month that is similar to the study by Golebiewska in 2011 that showed the most percentage of UTIs were diagnosed during the 1st month post transplantation.[18] The predominant isolated agent was E. coli (75% Group I and 66.7% Group II); similar to the result of other studies [14],[19],[20] also in the group of patients with UTI, the incidence of DM was more. It has been shown that SMZ/TMP or ciprofloxacin is effective for prophylaxis although high percentages of uropathogens are resistant to the former.[14],[21],[22],[23],[24],[25] Fluoroqiunolones are active against many agents and may represent a substitute or in combination for prophylaxis according to other investigations. One of the adverse effects is rising creatinine level in transplanted kidney, so it is rationales that add to the current regimen for a short course as in this study done. In the study by Hibberd et al.,[26] patients received either ciprofloxacin or TMP-SMZ daily for 6 months following transplantation and showed that ciprofloxacin is at least as effective as TMP-SMZ in the prevention of UTI. Although in our study, we used combination regimen and used ciprofloxacin only for 1 month, because the risk of emergence of ciprofloxacin-resistant strains and also the risk of adverse effect of ciprofloxacin in renal transplant patients when use for more duration time. A retrospective study by Wojciechowski et al. in 2013[27] also implied that adding ciprofloxacin to SMZ/TMP was more effective for reducing the risk of UTI, which is compatible with our study; however, the two limitations of that study was the first that the dosing regimen of SMZ/TMP (lower doses) which may affect the results in favor of ciprofloxacin, and the second that was a retrospective study. The limitation of our study was the sample size, due to two reasons; first, a load of transplant patients in this center and second, we could not enroll all of the transplant patients in this study because of not meeting inclusion criteria, decline to participate, and other reasons. Up to now, overall, the data for comparing these two drugs are also limited.[26],[27],[28] Hence, more studies need to evaluate this concern.


  Conclusions Top


This clinical trial demonstrated that the addition of 1-month ciprofloxacin to the current regimen, SMZ/TMP, for prophylaxis of UTI in renal transplant patients was associated with a reduced risk of it. As the resistance to current antibiotic prophylaxis regimens increases and according to the significant prevalence of UTI among renal transplant patients and also limited data on urinary infection prophylaxis in this high-risk group of patients about comparing the effect of different antibiotic prophylaxis regimen, the more investigation is needed.

Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge all the academic staff of Infectious Diseases and Nephrology Department of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

 
  References Top

1.
Iqbal T, Naqvi R, Akhter SF. Frequency of urinary tract infection in renal transplant recipients and effect on graft function. J Pak Med Assoc 2010;60:826-9.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Schmaldienst S, Dittrich E, Hörl WH. Urinary tract infections after renal transplantation. Curr Opin Urol 2002;12:125-30.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Müller V, Becker G, Delfs M, Albrecht KH, Philipp T, Heemann U. Do urinary tract infections trigger chronic kidney transplant rejection in man? J Urol 1998;159:1826-9.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Säemann M, Hörl WH. Urinary tract infection in renal transplant recipients. Eur J Clin Invest 2008;38 Suppl 2:58-65.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Kentouni-Noly JC, Cloix P, Martin X, Rabodonirina M, Lefrancois N, Sepetjan M. Analysis of nosocomial infections in renal transplant and pancreas transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 1994;26:284.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Midtvedt K, Hartmann A, Midtvedt T, Brekke IB. Routine perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in renal transplantation. Nephrol Dial Transplant 1998;13:1637-41.  Back to cited text no. 6
[PUBMED]    
7.
Ritter J, Lewis LD, Mant TG, Ferro A. A Textbook of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics. 8th ed. London: Hodder Arnold; 2008.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Transplant Work Group. KDIGO clinical practice guideline for the care of kidney transplant recipients. Am J Transplant 2009;9 Suppl 3:S1-155.  Back to cited text no. 8
[PUBMED]    
9.
Karuthu S, Blumberg EA. Common infections in kidney transplant recipients. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2012;7:2058-70.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Di Cocco P, Orlando G, Mazzotta C, Rizza V, D'Angelo M, Clemente K, et al. Incidence of urinary tract infections caused by germs resistant to antibiotics commonly used after renal transplantation. Transplant Proc 2008;40:1881-4.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Wojciechowski D, Chanda R, Chandran S, et al. Ciprofloxacin prophylaxis in kidney transplant recipients reduces BK virus infection at 3 months but not at 1 year. Transplantation 2012; 94:1117.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Abbott KC, Swanson SJ, Richter ER, Bohen EM, Agodoa LY, Peters TG, et al. Late urinary tract infection after renal transplantation in the United States. Am J Kidney Dis 2004;44:353-62.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Maraha B, Bonten H, van Hooff H, Fiolet H, Buiting AG, Stobberingh EE. Infectious complications and antibiotic use in renal transplant recipients during a 1-year follow-up. Clin Microbiol Infect 2001;7:619-25.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
American journal of transplantation. Urinary tract infection in solid organ transplantation. 2013; 13:327-336.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Chuang P, Parikh CR, Langone A. Urinary tract infections after renal transplantation: A retrospective review at two US transplant centers. Clin Transplant 2005;19:230-5.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Lyerová L, Viklický O, Nemcová D, Teplan V. The incidence of infectious diseases after renal transplantation: A single-centre experience. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2008;31 Suppl 1:S58-62.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Abbott KC, Oliver JD 3rd, Hypolite I, Lepler LL, Kirk AD, Ko CW, et al. Hospitalizations for bacterial septicemia after renal transplantation in the united states. Am J Nephrol 2001;21:120-7.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Golebiewska J, Debska-Slizien A, Komarnicka J, Samet A, Rutkowski B. Urinary tract infections in renal transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 2011;43:2985-90.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Esezobor CI, Nourse P, Gajjar P. Urinary tract infection following kidney transplantation: Frequency, risk factors and graft function. Pediatr Nephrol 2012;27:651-7.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Kawecki D, Pacholczyk M, Lagiewska B, Adadynski L, Lisik W, Sawicka-Grzelak A, et al. Urinary tract infections in the early posttransplant period after liver transplantation: Etiologic agents and their susceptibility. Transplant Proc 2011;43:3052-4.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Green H, Rahamimov R, Gafter U, Leibovitci L, Paul M. Antibiotic prophylaxis for urinary tract infections in renal transplant recipients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Transpl Infect Dis 2011;13:441-7.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
Fox BC, Sollinger HW, Belzer FO, Maki DG. A prospective, randomized, double-blind study of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole for prophylaxis of infection in renal transplantation: Clinical efficacy, absorption of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, effects on the microflora, and the cost-benefit of prophylaxis. Am J Med 1990;89:255-74.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Tolkoff-Rubin NE, Cosimi AB, Russell PS, Rubin RH. A controlled study of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole prophylaxis of urinary tract infection in renal transplant recipients. Rev Infect Dis 1982;4:614-8.  Back to cited text no. 23
[PUBMED]    
24.
Moysés Neto M, Costa RS, Reis MA, Ferraz AS, Saber LT, Batista ME, et al. Use of ciprofloxacin as a prophylactic agent in urinary tract infections in renal transplant recipients. Clin Transplant 1997;11:446-52.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.
Kawecki D, Kwiatkowski A, Sawicka-Grzelak A, Durlik M, Paczek L, Chmura A, et al. Urinary tract infections in the early posttransplant period after kidney transplantation: Etiologic agents and their susceptibility. Transplant Proc 2011;43:2991-3.  Back to cited text no. 25
    
26.
Hibberd PL, Tolkoff-Rubin NE, Doran M, Delvecchio A, Cosimi AB, Delmonico FL, et al. Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole compared with ciprofloxacin for the prevention of urinary tract infection in renal transplant recipients. A double-blind, randomized controlled trial. Online J Curr Clin Trials 1992; Doc No 15.  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.
Wojciechowski D, Chandran S. Effect of ciprofloxacin combined with sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim prophylaxis on the incidence of urinary tract infections after kidney transplantation. Transplantation 2013;96:400-5.  Back to cited text no. 27
    
28.
Rafat C, Vimont S, Ancel PY, Xu-Dubois YC, Mesnard L, Ouali N, et al. Ofloxacin: New applications for the prevention of urinary tract infections in renal graft recipients. Transpl Infect Dis 2011;13:344-52.  Back to cited text no. 28
    



 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2]


This article has been cited by
1 Urinary Tract Infections in the First 6 Months after Renal Transplantation
Ziad Arabi, Khalefa Al Thiab, Abdulrahman Altheaby, Ghaleb Aboalsamh, Samy Kashkoush, Mohamad Almarastani, Mohammed F. Shaheen, Abdulrahman Altamimi, Wael O’hali, Khalid Bin Saad, Lina Alnajjar, Rawan Alhussein, Raghad Almuhiteb, Bashayr Alqahtani, Rayana Alotaibi, Marah Alqahtani, Mohammed Tawhari, Martin Sedlacek
International Journal of Nephrology. 2021; 2021: 1
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
2 Asymptomatic bacteriuria and urinary tract infections in kidney transplant recipients
Julien Coussement,Hannah Kaminski,Anne Scemla,Oriol Manuel
Current Opinion in Infectious Diseases. 2020; 33(6): 419
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
3 Urinary tract infections in solid organ transplant recipients: Guidelines from the American Society of Transplantation Infectious Diseases Community of Practice
Jason D. Goldman,Kathleen Julian
Clinical Transplantation. 2019; : e13507
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
4 The challenge of urinary tract infections in renal transplant recipients
Ian Hollyer,Michael G. Ison
Transplant Infectious Disease. 2018; : e12828
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
5 Recurrence of urinary tract infections and development of urinary-specific antibiogram for kidney transplant recipients
Ghazwa B. Korayem,Tirdad T. Zangeneh,Kathryn R. Matthias
Journal of Global Antimicrobial Resistance. 2018; 12: 119
[Pubmed] | [DOI]



 

Top
Previous article  Next article
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Me...
Results
Discussion
Conclusions
References
Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed2897    
    Printed45    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded473    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 5    

Recommend this journal