Does bacterial colonization influence ureteral stent-associated morbidity? A prospective study.

IF 1.3 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY Arab Journal of Urology Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1080/2090598X.2022.2164124
Mohamed Samir, Mahmoud Ahmed Mahmoud, Ahmed Tawfick
{"title":"Does bacterial colonization influence ureteral stent-associated morbidity? A prospective study.","authors":"Mohamed Samir,&nbsp;Mahmoud Ahmed Mahmoud,&nbsp;Ahmed Tawfick","doi":"10.1080/2090598X.2022.2164124","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>to evaluate the effect of bacterial colonization on ureteral stent-associated morbidity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a prospective study that took place between February 2019 and March 2022. We examined one hundred fifteen patients for ureteric stents application. On the same day of stent removal, the Arabic version of Ureteral Stent Symptoms Questionnaire (USSQ) was used to assess stent-associated morbidity. The stent-associated morbidity and the specificity and sensitivity of culture in the stent and midstream urine were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In 15.6% of the patients stent colonization was positive; E. coli was the most common isolated organism. There was no statistically significant difference between sex, age, irrigation fluid volume and duration of operation for stent colonization. However, stent indwelling time was significantly higher in patients with stents with positive cultures. In the colonized stents, there was a statistically significant difference with regards to the total score of USSQ, pain, urinary symptoms, work performance and additional problems of USSQ. Meanwhile, there was no statistically significant difference in the general health and sexual matter.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>stent colonization may be a contributing factor in stent-related morbidity. Stent bacterial colonization increases with the time of stent retention. Stent cultures are not needed as the same microorganisms are detected in urine cultures.</p>","PeriodicalId":8113,"journal":{"name":"Arab Journal of Urology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10373606/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arab Journal of Urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2090598X.2022.2164124","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objective: to evaluate the effect of bacterial colonization on ureteral stent-associated morbidity.

Methods: This was a prospective study that took place between February 2019 and March 2022. We examined one hundred fifteen patients for ureteric stents application. On the same day of stent removal, the Arabic version of Ureteral Stent Symptoms Questionnaire (USSQ) was used to assess stent-associated morbidity. The stent-associated morbidity and the specificity and sensitivity of culture in the stent and midstream urine were recorded.

Results: In 15.6% of the patients stent colonization was positive; E. coli was the most common isolated organism. There was no statistically significant difference between sex, age, irrigation fluid volume and duration of operation for stent colonization. However, stent indwelling time was significantly higher in patients with stents with positive cultures. In the colonized stents, there was a statistically significant difference with regards to the total score of USSQ, pain, urinary symptoms, work performance and additional problems of USSQ. Meanwhile, there was no statistically significant difference in the general health and sexual matter.

Conclusions: stent colonization may be a contributing factor in stent-related morbidity. Stent bacterial colonization increases with the time of stent retention. Stent cultures are not needed as the same microorganisms are detected in urine cultures.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
细菌定植是否影响输尿管支架相关的发病率?一项前瞻性研究。
目的:探讨细菌定植对输尿管支架相关疾病的影响。方法:这是一项前瞻性研究,于2019年2月至2022年3月进行。我们检查了115例输尿管支架的应用。在取出支架当天,使用阿拉伯文版输尿管支架症状问卷(USSQ)评估支架相关的发病率。记录支架相关的发病率以及支架和中游尿液培养的特异性和敏感性。结果:15.6%的患者支架定植阳性;大肠杆菌是最常见的分离菌。性别、年龄、灌洗液量、支架定植时间差异无统计学意义。然而,支架培养阳性的患者支架留置时间明显更长。在定植支架中,两组在USSQ总分、疼痛、泌尿系统症状、工作表现和USSQ附加问题上存在统计学显著差异。同时,在一般健康和性问题上没有统计学上的显著差异。结论:支架定植可能是支架相关发病率的一个因素。支架内细菌定植随着支架停留时间的延长而增加。不需要支架培养,因为在尿液培养中检测到相同的微生物。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Arab Journal of Urology
Arab Journal of Urology UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: The Arab Journal of Urology is a peer-reviewed journal that strives to provide a high standard of research and clinical material to the widest possible urological community worldwide. The journal encompasses all aspects of urology including: urological oncology, urological reconstructive surgery, urodynamics, female urology, pediatric urology, endourology, transplantation, erectile dysfunction, and urinary infections and inflammations. The journal provides reviews, original articles, editorials, surgical techniques, cases reports and correspondence. Urologists, oncologists, pathologists, radiologists and scientists are invited to submit their contributions to make the Arab Journal of Urology a viable international forum for the practical, timely and state-of-the-art clinical urology and basic urological research.
期刊最新文献
Idiopathic male infertility – what are we missing? Do mobile phones and laptop computers really impact sperm? Efficacy and safety of office-based diode laser ablation for recurrent low-grade non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer under local anaesthesia: A pilot study Posterior tibial nerve stimulation versus desmopressin in treating children with primary mono-symptomatic nocturnal enuresis. A randomized clinical trial “Laser vaporization of the prostate: A comparative study between ejaculatory preserving and non-ejaculatory preserving technique”
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1