Katia Vanolli, Mike Libasse Jost, Olivier Clerc, Daniel Genné, Gregor John
{"title":"上尿路感染或发热尿路感染患者的放射学检查。","authors":"Katia Vanolli, Mike Libasse Jost, Olivier Clerc, Daniel Genné, Gregor John","doi":"10.3390/idr16020015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Recent European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines and a clinical prediction rule developed by Van Nieuwkoop et al. suggest simple criteria for performing radiological imaging for patients with a febrile urinary tract infection (UTI). We analysed the records of patients with a UTI from four hospitals in Switzerland. Of 107 UTI patients, 58% underwent imaging and 69% (95%CI: 59-77%) and 64% (95%CI: 54-73%) of them were adequately managed according to Van Nieuwkoop's clinical rule and EAU guidelines, respectively. However, only 47% (95%CI: 33-61%) and 57% (95%CI: 44-69%) of the imaging performed would have been recommended according to their respective rules. Clinically significant imaging findings were associated with a history of urolithiasis (OR = 11.8; 95%CI: 3.0-46.5), gross haematuria (OR = 5.9; 95%CI: 1.6-22.1) and known urogenital anomalies (OR = 5.7; 95%CI: 1.8-18.2). Moreover, six of 16 (38%) patients with a clinically relevant abnormality displayed none of the criteria requiring imaging according to Van Nieuwkoop's rule or EAU guidelines. Thus, adherence to imaging guidelines was suboptimal, especially when imaging was not recommended. However, additional factors associated with clinically significant findings suggest the need for a new, efficient clinical prediction rule.</p>","PeriodicalId":13579,"journal":{"name":"Infectious Disease Reports","volume":"16 2","pages":"189-199"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10961809/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Radiological Explorations of Patients with Upper or Febrile Urinary Tract Infection.\",\"authors\":\"Katia Vanolli, Mike Libasse Jost, Olivier Clerc, Daniel Genné, Gregor John\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/idr16020015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Recent European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines and a clinical prediction rule developed by Van Nieuwkoop et al. suggest simple criteria for performing radiological imaging for patients with a febrile urinary tract infection (UTI). We analysed the records of patients with a UTI from four hospitals in Switzerland. Of 107 UTI patients, 58% underwent imaging and 69% (95%CI: 59-77%) and 64% (95%CI: 54-73%) of them were adequately managed according to Van Nieuwkoop's clinical rule and EAU guidelines, respectively. However, only 47% (95%CI: 33-61%) and 57% (95%CI: 44-69%) of the imaging performed would have been recommended according to their respective rules. Clinically significant imaging findings were associated with a history of urolithiasis (OR = 11.8; 95%CI: 3.0-46.5), gross haematuria (OR = 5.9; 95%CI: 1.6-22.1) and known urogenital anomalies (OR = 5.7; 95%CI: 1.8-18.2). Moreover, six of 16 (38%) patients with a clinically relevant abnormality displayed none of the criteria requiring imaging according to Van Nieuwkoop's rule or EAU guidelines. Thus, adherence to imaging guidelines was suboptimal, especially when imaging was not recommended. However, additional factors associated with clinically significant findings suggest the need for a new, efficient clinical prediction rule.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13579,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Infectious Disease Reports\",\"volume\":\"16 2\",\"pages\":\"189-199\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10961809/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Infectious Disease Reports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/idr16020015\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Infectious Disease Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/idr16020015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
欧洲泌尿学协会(EAU)最近的指导方针和 Van Nieuwkoop 等人制定的临床预测规则提出了对发热性尿路感染(UTI)患者进行放射成像检查的简单标准。我们分析了瑞士四家医院的尿路感染患者病历。在 107 名 UTI 患者中,58% 接受了影像学检查,69%(95%CI:59-77%)和 64%(95%CI:54-73%)的患者分别根据 Van Nieuwkoop 的临床规则和 EAU 指南进行了适当处理。然而,只有47%(95%CI:33-61%)和57%(95%CI:44-69%)的成像结果是根据各自的规则建议进行的。具有临床意义的成像结果与尿路结石病史(OR = 11.8;95%CI:3.0-46.5)、毛血尿(OR = 5.9;95%CI:1.6-22.1)和已知的泌尿生殖系统异常(OR = 5.7;95%CI:1.8-18.2)有关。此外,在 16 名有临床相关异常的患者中,有 6 名患者(38%)不符合 Van Nieuwkoop 规则或 EAU 指南中要求进行影像学检查的标准。因此,对影像学指南的遵守情况并不理想,尤其是在不建议进行影像学检查的情况下。然而,与具有临床意义的检查结果相关的其他因素表明,需要一种新的、有效的临床预测规则。
Radiological Explorations of Patients with Upper or Febrile Urinary Tract Infection.
Recent European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines and a clinical prediction rule developed by Van Nieuwkoop et al. suggest simple criteria for performing radiological imaging for patients with a febrile urinary tract infection (UTI). We analysed the records of patients with a UTI from four hospitals in Switzerland. Of 107 UTI patients, 58% underwent imaging and 69% (95%CI: 59-77%) and 64% (95%CI: 54-73%) of them were adequately managed according to Van Nieuwkoop's clinical rule and EAU guidelines, respectively. However, only 47% (95%CI: 33-61%) and 57% (95%CI: 44-69%) of the imaging performed would have been recommended according to their respective rules. Clinically significant imaging findings were associated with a history of urolithiasis (OR = 11.8; 95%CI: 3.0-46.5), gross haematuria (OR = 5.9; 95%CI: 1.6-22.1) and known urogenital anomalies (OR = 5.7; 95%CI: 1.8-18.2). Moreover, six of 16 (38%) patients with a clinically relevant abnormality displayed none of the criteria requiring imaging according to Van Nieuwkoop's rule or EAU guidelines. Thus, adherence to imaging guidelines was suboptimal, especially when imaging was not recommended. However, additional factors associated with clinically significant findings suggest the need for a new, efficient clinical prediction rule.