Skip to main content

Advertising Disclaimer »

Main menu

  • Journals
    • Pediatrics
    • Hospital Pediatrics
    • Pediatrics in Review
    • NeoReviews
    • AAP Grand Rounds
    • AAP News
  • Authors/Reviewers
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Author Guidelines
    • Reviewer Guidelines
    • Open Access
    • Editorial Policies
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Online First
    • Archive
    • Blogs
    • Topic/Program Collections
    • AAP Meeting Abstracts
  • Pediatric Collections
    • COVID-19
    • Racism and Its Effects on Pediatric Health
    • More Collections...
  • AAP Policy
  • Supplements
    • Supplements
    • Publish Supplement
  • Multimedia
    • Video Abstracts
    • Pediatrics On Call Podcast
  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Careers
  • Other Publications
    • American Academy of Pediatrics

User menu

  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
American Academy of Pediatrics

AAP Gateway

Advanced Search

AAP Logo

  • Log in
  • My Cart
  • Journals
    • Pediatrics
    • Hospital Pediatrics
    • Pediatrics in Review
    • NeoReviews
    • AAP Grand Rounds
    • AAP News
  • Authors/Reviewers
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Author Guidelines
    • Reviewer Guidelines
    • Open Access
    • Editorial Policies
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Online First
    • Archive
    • Blogs
    • Topic/Program Collections
    • AAP Meeting Abstracts
  • Pediatric Collections
    • COVID-19
    • Racism and Its Effects on Pediatric Health
    • More Collections...
  • AAP Policy
  • Supplements
    • Supplements
    • Publish Supplement
  • Multimedia
    • Video Abstracts
    • Pediatrics On Call Podcast
  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Careers

Discover Pediatric Collections on COVID-19 and Racism and Its Effects on Pediatric Health

American Academy of Pediatrics
From the American Academy of PediatricsClinical Practice Guideline

Reaffirmation of AAP Clinical Practice Guideline: The Diagnosis and Management of the Initial Urinary Tract Infection in Febrile Infants and Young Children 2–24 Months of Age

SUBCOMMITTEE ON URINARY TRACT INFECTION
Pediatrics December 2016, 138 (6) e20163026; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2016-3026
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • Comments
Loading
Download PDF
  • Abbreviations:
    BBD —
    bowel/bladder dysfunction
    CAP —
    continuous antimicrobial prophylaxis
    cfu —
    colony-forming units
    CPG —
    clinical practice guideline
    RBUS —
    renal and bladder ultrasonography
    RIVUR —
    Randomized Intervention for Children with Vesicoureteral Reflux
    SPA —
    suprapubic aspiration
    UTI —
    urinary tract infection
    VCUG —
    voiding cystourethrography
    VUR —
    vesicoureteral reflux
  • It is the policy of the American Academy of Pediatrics to reassess clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) every 5 years and retire, revise, or reaffirm them. The members of the urinary tract infection (UTI) subcommittee who developed the 2011 UTI CPG1 have reviewed the literature published since 2011 along with unpublished manuscripts and the status of some clinical trials still in progress. With this article, we reaffirm the 2011 UTI CPG and provide an updated review of the supporting evidence. For the convenience of the reader, we reiterate the 7 Key Action Statements here to obviate the need to consult the 2011 UTI CPG, although interested readers may want to review the text of the guideline1 and/or its accompanying technical report.2

    Action Statement 1

    If a clinician decides that a febrile infant with no apparent source for the fever requires antimicrobial therapy to be administered because of ill appearance or another pressing reason, the clinician should ensure that a urine specimen is obtained for both culture and urinalysis before an antimicrobial is administered; the specimen needs to be obtained through catheterization or suprapubic aspiration (SPA), because the diagnosis of UTI cannot be established reliably through culture of urine collected in a bag (evidence quality: A; strong recommendation).

    Comment

    A key to an accurate diagnosis of UTI is obtaining a sample of urine for culture with minimal contamination before starting antimicrobial agents. Urine collected in a bag or via a clean catch method is suitable for urinalysis (see Action Statement 2, Option 2), but such specimens (especially urine collected in a bag) are less appropriate for culture. If a culture obtained by bag is positive, the likelihood of a false positive is extremely high, so the result must be confirmed by culturing urine obtained by a more reliable method; if an antimicrobial agent is present in the urine, the opportunity for confirmation is likely to be lost.

    Although samples of urine obtained by transurethral catheterization may be contaminated by urethral flora, meticulous technique can reduce this possibility. To avoid contamination, 2 practical steps should be implemented: (1) the first few milliliters obtained by catheter should be discarded (allowed to fall outside of the sterile collecting vessel) and only the subsequent urine cultured; and (2) if the attempt at catheterization is unsuccessful, a new, clean catheter should be used (aided, in girls, by leaving the initial catheter in place as a marker).

    Action Statement 2

    If a clinician assesses a febrile infant with no apparent source for the fever as not being so ill as to require immediate antimicrobial therapy, then the clinician should assess the likelihood of UTI.

    • Action Statement 2a. If the clinician determines the febrile infant to have a low likelihood of UTI (see text), then clinical follow-up monitoring without testing is sufficient (evidence quality: A; strong recommendation).

    • Action Statement 2b. If the clinician determines that the febrile infant is not in a low-risk group (see below), then there are 2 choices (evidence quality: A; strong recommendation).

    • Option 1 is to obtain a urine specimen through catheterization or SPA for culture and urinalysis.

    • Option 2 is to obtain a urine specimen through the most convenient means and to perform a urinalysis. If the urinalysis results suggest a UTI (positive leukocyte esterase test results or nitrite test or microscopic analysis results for leukocytes or bacteria), then a urine specimen should be obtained through catheterization or SPA and cultured; if urinalysis of fresh (less than 1 hour since void) urine yields negative leukocyte esterase and nitrite results, then it is reasonable to monitor the clinical course without initiating antimicrobial therapy, recognizing that a negative urinalysis does not rule out a UTI with certainty.

    Comment

    When the patient’s degree of illness does not warrant immediate antimicrobial treatment and the risk of UTI is extremely low, the patient may be observed without assessing the urine. (The risk assessment tables in the 2011 UTI CPG have been simplified into algorithm form.3) If there is a low but real risk of infection, then either the best possible specimen should be obtained for urinalysis and culture, or a sample of urine obtained by a convenient method and a judgment made about culturing the urine dependent on the findings of the urinalysis or dipstick. A positive urinalysis provides sufficient concern to mandate a properly obtained urine specimen. This 2-step process (Option 2) is not only suitable for office practice but has been demonstrated to be feasible and beneficial in a busy pediatric emergency department, with the catheterization rate decreasing from 63% to fewer than 30% without increasing length of stay or missing UTIs.4

    Action Statement 3

    To establish the diagnosis of UTI, clinicians should require both urinalysis results that suggest infection (pyuria and/or bacteriuria) and the presence of at least 50 000 colony-forming units (cfu) per milliliter of a uropathogen cultured from a urine specimen obtained through transurethral catheterization or SPA (evidence quality: C; recommendation).

    Comment

    The thrust of this key action statement is that the diagnosis of UTI in febrile infants is signaled by the presence of both bacteriuria and pyuria. In general, pyuria without bacteriuria is insufficient to make a diagnosis of UTI because it is nonspecific and occurs in the absence of infection (eg, Kawasaki disease, chemical urethritis, streptococcal infections). Likewise, bacteriuria, without pyuria is attributable to external contamination, asymptomatic bacteriuria, or, rarely, very early infection (before the onset of inflammation). Non–Escherichia coli isolates are less frequently associated with pyuria than E coli,5 but the significance of this association is not clear at present. Non–E coli uropathogens are of concern because they are more likely to result in scarring than E coli,6 but animal studies demonstrate the host inflammatory response to be what causes scarring rather than the presence of organisms.7 Moreover, the rate of asymptomatic bacteriuria is sufficient to account for the lack of association with pyuria.

    The remaining question is what constitutes “significant” bacteriuria and “significant” pyuria. In 1994, by using single versus multiple organisms to distinguish true UTI from contamination, 50 000 cfu/mL was proposed as the appropriate threshold for specimens obtained by catheterization,8 recommended in the 2011 UTI CPG and implemented in the Randomized Intervention for Children with Vesicoureteral Reflux (RIVUR) trial.9 Lower colony counts are sufficient if the urine specimen is obtained by SPA and, thus, less likely to be contaminated, but most (80%) cases of UTI documented with urine obtained by SPA have 105 cfu/mL or more. Colony counts lower than 50 000 cfu/mL are currently being considered for the diagnosis of UTI.10 If 10 000 cfu/mL coupled with symptoms (eg, fever) and evidence of inflammation (pyuria) proves both sensitive and specific, this threshold would be of particular assistance to clinicians who use laboratories that do not specify colony counts between 10 000 and 100 000 cfu/mL and, thereby, make the criterion of 50 000 cfu/mL difficult to use.

    Significant pyuria is ≥10 white blood cells/mm3 on an “enhanced urinalysis” or ≥5 white blood cells per high power field on a centrifuged specimen of urine or any leukocyte esterase on a dipstick.

    Action Statement 4

    • Action Statement 4a. When initiating treatment, the clinician should base the choice of route of administration on practical considerations: initiating treatment orally or parenterally is equally efficacious. The clinician should base the choice of agent on local antimicrobial sensitivity patterns (if available) and should adjust the choice according to sensitivity testing of the isolated uropathogen (evidence quality: A; strong recommendation).

    • Action Statement 4b. The clinician should choose 7 to 14 days as the duration of antimicrobial therapy (evidence quality B; recommendation).

    Comment

    Basing the choice of an initial antimicrobial agent on local sensitivity patterns can be difficult because applicable information may not be available. Whether the child has received antimicrobial therapy in the recent past should be considered. This exposure constitutes a risk factor for resistance to the recently prescribed antimicrobial. Further delineation of treatment duration has not been forthcoming, but a randomized controlled trial is currently under way comparing the effectiveness of 5 days versus 10 days of treatment.11

    Note: The dose of ceftriaxone in Table 2 should be 50 mg/kg, every 24 h.

    Action Statement 5

    Febrile infants with UTIs should undergo renal and bladder ultrasonography (RBUS) (evidence quality: C; recommendation).

    Comment

    As noted in the 2011 CPG, it is important that the study be a renal and bladder ultrasonogram, not a limited renal ultrasonogram. Ideally, the patient should be well-hydrated for the examination and the bladder should be evaluated while distended. Concern has been raised that RBUS is not effective to detect vesicoureteral reflux (VUR), as it is frequently normal in infants with low-grade VUR and even in some who have high-grade VUR. Moreover, nonspecific RBUS findings, such as mild renal pelvic or ureteral distention, are common and are not necessarily associated with reflux. However, low-grade VUR is generally not considered of concern for renal damage, and most studies (other than the RIVUR trial9) have demonstrated continuous antimicrobial prophylaxis (CAP) to lack benefit in this group.1,2 Although RBUS is not invariably abnormal in infants with grades IV and V VUR, it does identify most, and, of particular importance, an abnormal RBUS is a major risk factor for scarring.6

    Action Statement 6

    • Action Statement 6a. Voiding cystourethrography (VCUG) should not be performed routinely after the first febrile UTI; VCUG is indicated if RBUS reveals hydronephrosis, scarring, or other findings that would suggest either high-grade VUR or obstructive uropathy, as well as in other atypical or complex clinical circumstances (evidence quality B; recommendation).

    • Action Statement 6b. Further evaluation should be conducted if there is a recurrence of febrile UTI (evidence quality: X; recommendation).

    Comment

    For decades, UTIs in infants were considered harbingers of underlying anatomic and/or physiologic abnormalities, so RBUS and VCUG were recommended to be performed routinely. VUR was a particular concern; CAP was assumed to be effective in preventing UTI and became standard practice when VUR was discovered. In the years leading up to the 2011 guideline, randomized controlled trials of CAP were performed. Authors of the 6 studies published in 2006-2010 graciously provided data to the guideline committee, permitting a meta-analysis of data specifically targeting febrile infants 2 to 24 months of age. CAP was not demonstrated to be effective, so the need to identify VUR by routine voiding cystourethrography was discouraged.1,2 A recent large trial in the United States, the RIVUR trial, concluded that CAP was of benefit, but, to prevent 1 UTI recurrence required 5840 doses of antimicrobial and did not reduce the rate of renal scarring.9

    Since the publication of the 2011 guideline, multiple studies have demonstrated that abnormalities are missed by the selective imaging recommended in the guideline; however, there is no evidence that identifying these missed abnormalities is of sufficient clinical benefit to offset the cost, discomfort, and radiation.12 Compared with performing the full array of imaging tests, the radiation burden incurred with the application of the guideline has been calculated to be reduced by 93%.13 Moreover, in population studies, the significance of VUR and the value of treating VUR have been questioned.14,15

    The authors of the RIVUR trial and its companion study, Careful Urinary Tract Infection Evaluation, have called attention to bowel/bladder dysfunction (BBD) as a major risk factor for UTI recurrences and recognize that, in children who have a UTI recurrence, evaluation for BBD (ie, constipation), rather than for VUR, can be performed by nonspecialists and does not incur high cost, cause discomfort, or require radiation.16 BBD has long been underappreciated and deserves greater consideration.

    Action Statement 7

    After confirmation of UTI, the clinician should instruct parents or guardians to seek prompt medical evaluation (ideally within 48 hours) for future febrile illnesses to ensure that recurrent infections can be detected and treated promptly (evidence quality: C; recommendation).

    Comment

    Prompt treatment is of clinical benefit to the child with the acute infection. What has been controversial is the definition of “prompt” and the relationship to renal scarring. A recent study identified that the median time to treatment was shorter in infants who did not incur a scar than in those who did (48 vs 72 hours). The study also noted that the rate of scarring increased minimally between days 1 and 2 and between days 2 and 3 but was much higher thereafter.17

    Subcommittee on Urinary Tract Infection, 2009-2011

    Kenneth B. Roberts, MD, FAAP Chair

    Stephen M. Downs, MD, MS, FAAP

    S. Maria E. Finnell, MD, MS, FAAP

    *Stanley Hellerstein, MD (deceased)

    Linda D. Shortliffe, MD

    Ellen R. Wald, MD, FAAP, Vice-Chair

    J. Michael Zerin, MD

    Staff

    Kymika Okechukwu, MPA, Manager, Evidence-Based Practice Initiatives

    Footnotes

    • This document is copyrighted and is property of the American Academy of Pediatrics and its Board of Directors. All authors have filed conflict of interest statements with the American Academy of Pediatrics. Any conflicts have been resolved through a process approved by the Board of Directors. The American Academy of Pediatrics has neither solicited nor accepted any commercial involvement in the development of the content of this publication.

    • The recommendations in this practice guideline do not indicate an exclusive course of treatment or serve as a standard of medical care. Variations, taking into account individual circumstances, may be appropriate.

    • All clinical practice guidelines from the American Academy of Pediatrics automatically expire 5 years after publication unless reaffirmed, revised, or retired at or before that time.

    • FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: The authors have indicated they do not have a financial relationship relevant to this article to disclose.

    • FUNDING: No external funding.

    • POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST: The authors have indicated they have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.

    • ↵* All but Dr Hellerstein participated in this reaffirmation.

    References

    1. ↵
      1. Roberts KB; Subcommittee on Urinary Tract Infection, Steering Committee on Quality Improvement and Management
      . Urinary tract infection: clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis and management of the initial UTI in febrile infants and children 2 to 24 months. Pediatrics. 2011;128(3):595–610pmid:21873693
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    2. ↵
      1. Finnell SM,
      2. Carroll AE,
      3. Downs SM; Subcommittee on Urinary Tract Infection
      . Technical report—Diagnosis and management of an initial UTI in febrile infants and young children. Pediatrics. 2011;128(3). Available at: www.pediatrics.org/cgi/content/full/128/3/e749 PubMedpmid:21873694
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    3. ↵
      1. Roberts KB
      . Revised AAP Guideline on UTI in Febrile Infants and Young Children. Am Fam Physician. 2012;86(10):940–946pmid:23157147
      OpenUrlPubMed
    4. ↵
      1. Lavelle JM,
      2. Blackstone MM,
      3. Funari MK, et al
      . Two-step process for ED UTI screening in febrile young children: reducing catheterization rates. Pediatrics. 2016;138(1):e20153023pmid:27255151
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    5. ↵
      1. Shaikh N,
      2. Shope TR,
      3. Hoberman A,
      4. Vigliotti A,
      5. Kurs-Lasky M,
      6. Martin JM
      . Association between uropathogen and pyuria. Pediatrics. 2016;138(1):e20160087pmid:27328921
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    6. ↵
      1. Shaikh N,
      2. Craig JC,
      3. Rovers MM, et al
      . Identification of children and adolescents at risk for renal scarring after a first urinary tract infection: a meta-analysis with individual patient data. JAMA Pediatr. 2014;168(10):893–900pmid:25089634
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    7. ↵
      1. Glauser MP,
      2. Meylan P,
      3. Bille J
      . The inflammatory response and tissue damage. The example of renal scars following acute renal infection. Pediatr Nephrol. 1987;1(4):615–622pmid:3153342
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    8. ↵
      1. Hoberman A,
      2. Wald ER,
      3. Reynolds EA,
      4. Penchansky L,
      5. Charron M
      . Pyuria and bacteriuria in urine specimens obtained by catheter from young children with fever. J Pediatr. 1994;124(4):513–519pmid:8151463
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    9. ↵
      1. Hoberman A,
      2. Greenfield SP,
      3. Mattoo TK, et al; RIVUR Trial Investigators
      . Antimicrobial prophylaxis for children with vesicoureteral reflux. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(25):2367–2376pmid:24795142
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    10. ↵
      1. Tullus K
      . Low urinary bacterial counts: do they count? Pediatr Nephrol. 2016;31(2):171–174pmid:26474778
      OpenUrlPubMed
    11. ↵
      1. Hoberman A
      . The SCOUT study: short course therapy for urinary tract infections in children. Available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01595529. Accessed October 14, 2016
    12. ↵
      1. Narchi H,
      2. Marah M,
      3. Khan AA, et al.
      Renal tract abnormalities missed in a historical cohort of your children with UTI if the NICE and AAP imaging guidelines were applied. J Pediatr Urol. 2015;11(5):252.e1–7
      OpenUrl
    13. ↵
      1. La Scola C,
      2. De Mutiis C,
      3. Hewitt IK, et al
      . Different guidelines for imaging after first UTI in febrile infants: yield, cost, and radiation. Pediatrics. 2013;131(3). Available at: www.pediatrics.org/cgi/content/full/131/3/e665 PubMedpmid:23439905
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    14. ↵
      1. Salo J,
      2. Ikäheimo R,
      3. Tapiainen T,
      4. Uhari M
      . Childhood urinary tract infections as a cause of chronic kidney disease. Pediatrics. 2011;128(5):840–847pmid:21987701
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    15. ↵
      1. Craig JC,
      2. Williams GJ
      . Denominators do matter: it’s a myth—urinary tract infection does not cause chronic kidney disease. Pediatrics. 2011;128(5):984–985pmid:21987711
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    16. ↵
      1. Shaikh N,
      2. Hoberman A,
      3. Keren R, et al
      . Recurrent urinary tract infections in children with bladder and bowel dysfunction. Pediatrics. 2016;137(1):e20152982pmid:26647376
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    17. ↵
      1. Shaikh N,
      2. Mattoo TK,
      3. Keren R, et al
      . Early antibiotic treatment for pediatric febrile urinary tract infection and renal scarring. JAMA Pediatr. 2016;170(9):848–854pmid:27455161
      OpenUrlPubMed
    • Copyright © 2016 by the American Academy of Pediatrics
    PreviousNext
    Back to top

    Advertising Disclaimer »

    In this issue

    Pediatrics
    Vol. 138, Issue 6
    1 Dec 2016
    • Table of Contents
    • Index by author
    View this article with LENS
    PreviousNext
    Email Article

    Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Academy of Pediatrics.

    NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

    Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
    Reaffirmation of AAP Clinical Practice Guideline: The Diagnosis and Management of the Initial Urinary Tract Infection in Febrile Infants and Young Children 2–24 Months of Age
    (Your Name) has sent you a message from American Academy of Pediatrics
    (Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Academy of Pediatrics web site.
    CAPTCHA
    This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
    Request Permissions
    Article Alerts
    Log in
    You will be redirected to aap.org to login or to create your account.
    Or Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
    Citation Tools
    Reaffirmation of AAP Clinical Practice Guideline: The Diagnosis and Management of the Initial Urinary Tract Infection in Febrile Infants and Young Children 2–24 Months of Age
    SUBCOMMITTEE ON URINARY TRACT INFECTION
    Pediatrics Dec 2016, 138 (6) e20163026; DOI: 10.1542/peds.2016-3026

    Citation Manager Formats

    • BibTeX
    • Bookends
    • EasyBib
    • EndNote (tagged)
    • EndNote 8 (xml)
    • Medlars
    • Mendeley
    • Papers
    • RefWorks Tagged
    • Ref Manager
    • RIS
    • Zotero
    Share
    Reaffirmation of AAP Clinical Practice Guideline: The Diagnosis and Management of the Initial Urinary Tract Infection in Febrile Infants and Young Children 2–24 Months of Age
    SUBCOMMITTEE ON URINARY TRACT INFECTION
    Pediatrics Dec 2016, 138 (6) e20163026; DOI: 10.1542/peds.2016-3026
    del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
    Print
    Download PDF
    Insight Alerts
    • Table of Contents

    Jump to section

    • Article
      • Action Statement 1
      • Action Statement 2
      • Action Statement 3
      • Action Statement 4
      • Action Statement 5
      • Action Statement 6
      • Action Statement 7
      • Subcommittee on Urinary Tract Infection, 2009-2011
      • Staff
      • Footnotes
      • References
    • Info & Metrics
    • Comments

    Related Articles

    • No related articles found.
    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar

    Cited By...

    • Predicting Urinary Tract Infections With Interval Likelihood Ratios
    • Whats the catch? Urine sample collection from young pre-continent children: a qualitative study in primary care.
    • Relationship Between Clinical Factors and Duration of IV Antibiotic Treatment in Neonatal UTI
    • Clinical Predictors for Abnormal Renal Bladder Ultrasound in Hospitalized Young Children With a First Febrile Urinary Tract Infection
    • Improving Antibiotic Prescribing for Pediatric Urinary Tract Infections in Outpatient Settings
    • Non-invasive techniques for stimulating urine production in non-toilet trained children: a systematic review
    • Getting Specific About Urine Specific Gravity
    • Urinary tract infections in children: an overview of diagnosis and management
    • Point-of-Care Ultrasound for the Pediatric Hospitalists Practice
    • Outpatient Treatment of UTIs in Children <2 Years
    • Emergency Department Revisits After an Initial Parenteral Antibiotic Dose for UTI
    • Clinical Characteristics and Health Outcomes of Neonates Reporting to the Emergency Department With Hypothermia
    • Diagnosis and Management of Urinary Tract Infections in Premature and Term Infants
    • Diagnosing UTI in Young Febrile Infants
    • The Diagnosis of UTI: Colony Count Criteria Revisited
    • Accuracy of the Urinalysis for Urinary Tract Infections in Febrile Infants 60 Days and Younger
    • Urinary Tract Infections in Children
    • Trends in Intravenous Antibiotic Duration for Urinary Tract Infections in Young Infants
    • Urinary Tract Infection Antibiotic Trial Study Design: A Systematic Review
    • Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Urinary Tract Infection-Related Renal Scarring: A Systematic Review
    • Google Scholar

    More in this TOC Section

    • AAP Publications Reaffirmed or Retired
    • Caring for American Indian and Alaska Native Children and Adolescents
    • Recommended Childhood and Adolescent Immunization Schedule: United States, 2021
    Show more From the American Academy of Pediatrics

    Similar Articles

    Subjects

    • Urology
      • Urology
    • AAP Policy Collections by Authoring Entities
      • Subcommittee on Urinary Tract Infection
    • Journal Info
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Policies
    • Overview
    • Licensing Information
    • Authors/Reviewers
    • Author Guidelines
    • Submit My Manuscript
    • Open Access
    • Reviewer Guidelines
    • Librarians
    • Institutional Subscriptions
    • Usage Stats
    • Support
    • Contact Us
    • Subscribe
    • Resources
    • Media Kit
    • About
    • International Access
    • Terms of Use
    • Privacy Statement
    • FAQ
    • AAP.org
    • shopAAP
    • Follow American Academy of Pediatrics on Instagram
    • Visit American Academy of Pediatrics on Facebook
    • Follow American Academy of Pediatrics on Twitter
    • Follow American Academy of Pediatrics on Youtube
    • RSS
    American Academy of Pediatrics

    © 2021 American Academy of Pediatrics