P-790. Cephalexin Versus Cefdinir for the Treatment of Uncomplicated Urinary Tract Infections

Abstract Background Due to its low bioavailability and poor urinary penetration, there are concerns that cefdinir is a suboptimal agent for the treatment of urinary tract infections (UTI). There is limited available literature examining cefdinir’s use in UTIs which has not shown worse outcomes compared to other oral beta-lactams; however, these studies had significant limitations, such as small sample size, short periods of follow up, or lack of assessment of clinical cure. Methods This retrospective, multicenter cohort study included adult female patients who received either cephalexin or cefdinir for 5 to 7 days for symptomatic uncomplicated UTI (uUTI). The primary objective was to compare uUTI treatment failure, defined as recurrent or continued symptoms within 30 days, between patients treated with cephalexin 500 mg twice daily (cephalexin group) and cefdinir 300 mg twice daily (cefdinir group) in the outpatient setting. Secondary outcomes included time to treatment failure, adverse events within 7 days of treatment, and Clostridioides difficile within 30 days of treatment. Results A total of 367 patients were included (cephalexin, n = 200; cefdinir, n = 167). Patients in both groups were treated for a median of 7 days. Patients treated with cefdinir experienced a significantly higher rate of treatment failure (cephalexin 12.5% vs. cefdinir 23.4%, p=0.006), and cefdinir was independently associated with treatment failure (OR: 1.9 [95% CI: 1.1-3.4]). Additionally, patients who experienced treatment failure with cefdinir had a higher incidence of cefazolin-non-susceptible pathogens (cephalexin 0% vs. cefdinir 37.5%; p=0.024) and ceftriaxone-non-susceptible pathogens (cephalexin 0% vs. 31.2%; p=0.053) on repeat culture. Conclusion Cefdinir was independently associated with treatment failure with nearly twice as high of failure rate compared with cephalexin for the treatment of outpatient uUTI. Patients who failed treatment with cefdinir were more likely to demonstrate first- and third-generation cephalosporin resistance on subsequent urine culture. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Open Forum Infectious Diseases
Published
2026-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofaf695.1001
Primary Topic
Urinary Tract Infections Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

P-790. Cephalexin Versus Cefdinir for the Treatment of Uncomplicated Urinary Tract Infections

Andrew Jameson, Kristen Eid, Destiny M Hughson, Tyler M. Mitzner et al.
Open Forum Infectious Diseases
Urinary Tract Infections Management
article

P-790. Cephalexin Versus Cefdinir for the Treatment of Uncomplicated Urinary Tract Infections

Andrew Jameson, Kristen Eid, Destiny M Hughson, Tyler M. Mitzner, Lisa E Dumkow
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background Due to its low bioavailability and poor urinary penetration, there are concerns that cefdinir is a suboptimal agent for the treatment of urinary tract infections (UTI). There is limited available literature examining cefdinir’s use in UTIs which has not shown worse outcomes compared to other oral beta-lactams; however, these studies had significant limitations, such as small sample size, short periods of follow up, or lack of assessment of clinical cure. Methods This retrospective, multicenter cohort study included adult female patients who received either cephalexin or cefdinir for 5 to 7 days for symptomatic uncomplicated UTI (uUTI). The primary objective was to compare uUTI treatment failure, defined as recurrent or continued symptoms within 30 days, between patients treated with cephalexin 500 mg twice daily (cephalexin group) and cefdinir 300 mg twice daily (cefdinir group) in the outpatient setting. Secondary outcomes included time to treatment failure, adverse events within 7 days of treatment, and Clostridioides difficile within 30 days of treatment. Results A total of 367 patients were included (cephalexin, n = 200; cefdinir, n = 167). Patients in both groups were treated for a median of 7 days. Patients treated with cefdinir experienced a significantly higher rate of treatment failure (cephalexin 12.5% vs. cefdinir 23.4%, p=0.006), and cefdinir was independently associated with treatment failure (OR: 1.9 [95% CI: 1.1-3.4]). Additionally, patients who experienced treatment failure with cefdinir had a higher incidence of cefazolin-non-susceptible pathogens (cephalexin 0% vs. cefdinir 37.5%; p=0.024) and ceftriaxone-non-susceptible pathogens (cephalexin 0% vs. 31.2%; p=0.053) on repeat culture. Conclusion Cefdinir was independently associated with treatment failure with nearly twice as high of failure rate compared with cephalexin for the treatment of outpatient uUTI. Patients who failed treatment with cefdinir were more likely to demonstrate first- and third-generation cephalosporin resistance on subsequent urine culture. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Open Forum Infectious DiseasesVol. 13(Supplement_1)
Trinity Health (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 91%
Urinary Tract Infections Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.