4.4 Article

Relationship Between Urinary Tract Infection and Self-Retaining Double-J Catheter Colonization

Journal

JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY
Volume 23, Issue 6, Pages 1015-1019

Publisher

MARY ANN LIEBERT INC
DOI: 10.1089/end.2008.0518

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Medical University of Lodz [502-19-560]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and Purpose: Long-term ureteral stenting is associated with bacterial colonization of both catheter surface and urine. The aim of the study was to evaluate the correlation between the type of bacteria cultured from the Double-J catheter, removed from urinary tract, and cultured from urine. Relationship of the Double-J catheter and urine culture with the duration of Double-J stenting, gender, the presence of diabetes mellitus, as well as the reason for stenting and manner of catheter insertion was also evaluated. Patients and Methods: Sixty-five patients were enrolled in the study. Urine specimens were cultured before stent insertion and removal. The stent was sent immediately for culture. Data such as age, sex, presence of diabetes mellitus, reason for stenting, and manner of catheterization were recorded. Results: Urine cultures were positive in 17 cases, while catheter cultures were positive in 64 cases. In 10 cases, the same bacterial species were colonized from urine and stent surface, while in one case, both cultures were negative. In seven patients, both cultures showed different bacterial species, and in 47 cases, urine cultures were negative while the catheters were colonized. Conclusions: The only significant correlation was noted between urine culture and stenting duration (P < 0.05). Double-J catheter retention in the urinary tract is associated with a high risk of bacterial colonization, while the risk of urine infection is about fourfold lower. There is a great discrepancy between urine and catheter cultures.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available