Display options
Cite
Lopez Imizcoz F, Burek CM, Sager C, et al. Pediatric Urodynamic Study Without a Preprocedural Urine Culture, Is It Safe in Clinical Practice?. Urology. 2020;145:224-228doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2020.07.054.
Lopez Imizcoz, F., Burek, C. M., Sager, C., Vasquez Patiño, M., Gomez, Y. R., Szklarz, M. T., Tessi, C., Ruiz, J., Weller, S., & Corbetta, J. P. (2020). Pediatric Urodynamic Study Without a Preprocedural Urine Culture, Is It Safe in Clinical Practice?. Urology, 145224-228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2020.07.054
Lopez Imizcoz, Felicitas, et al. "Pediatric Urodynamic Study Without a Preprocedural Urine Culture, Is It Safe in Clinical Practice?." Urology vol. 145 (2020): 224-228. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2020.07.054
Lopez Imizcoz F, Burek CM, Sager C, Vasquez Patiño M, Gomez YR, Szklarz MT, Tessi C, Ruiz J, Weller S, Corbetta JP. Pediatric Urodynamic Study Without a Preprocedural Urine Culture, Is It Safe in Clinical Practice?. Urology. 2020 Nov;145:224-228. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2020.07.054. Epub 2020 Aug 08. PMID: 32781080.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Urology. 2020 Nov;145:224-228. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2020.07.054. Epub 2020 Aug 08.

Pediatric Urodynamic Study Without a Preprocedural Urine Culture, Is It Safe in Clinical Practice?.

Urology

Felicitas Lopez Imizcoz, Carol Maria Burek, Cristian Sager, Mariana Vasquez Patiño, Yesica Ruth Gomez, María Tatiana Szklarz, Catalina Tessi, Javier Ruiz, Santiago Weller, Juan Pablo Corbetta

Affiliations

  1. Urology Department ¨Prof. Dr. Juan P. Garrahan¨ Pediatric Hospital, Buenos Aires, Argentina. Electronic address: [email protected].
  2. Urology Department ¨Prof. Dr. Juan P. Garrahan¨ Pediatric Hospital, Buenos Aires, Argentina.

PMID: 32781080 DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2020.07.054

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To prove that incidence of UTI after a pediatric urodynamic study (UDS) is low, and that patients without urine culture (UC) analysis prior to a UDS will not have a significant increase in the incidence of UTI (post-UDS UTI).

METHODS: Prospective cohort study including consecutive pediatric patients undergoing UDS in a single center for 1 year. Patients were divided in 2 groups: (G1) UDS with a previous negative UC and (G2) UDS without a previous UC analysis. A clean UC was obtained in all patients at the moment of the UDS (UDS-UC). Primary outcome was post-UDS UTI. Secondary outcome was to compare UC cost per patient and cancellation rates in each group. All patients were followed 15 days after the UDS to detect onset of UTI symptoms.

RESULTS: Four hundred two patients were included, 198 patients in G1 and 204 patients in G2. Median age was 9 years old. Both groups were similar in terms of demographic and clinical records data except for a proportion of patients on CIC which was larger in G2 (P <.008). Overall incidence of post-UDS UTI was 0.7% (3/402), G2 incidence (0.98%) being slightly higher than G1 (0.50%; P <.58). UDS-UC was positive in 32% of G1 vs 55% in G2 (P <.001). About 98% of patients with positive UDS-UC did not progress to symptomatic UTI. G1 cost was 140% higher than G2.

CONCLUSION: Overall incidence of post-UDS UTI is low (0.7%). Patients without UC prior to UDS did not have a significant increase in post-UDS UTI.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Publication Types