1887

Abstract

The question of whether a single day of incubation is sufficient for urine cultures has been a matter of debate.

The aim of this study was to investigate the potential benefit of prolonged incubation for initially culture-negative urines.

Eight hundred and twelve urine specimens with no growth after incubation for 20 h were incubated for an additional 20 h to detect slower growing uropathogenic organisms.

This study included a considerable number of urine cultures from immunocompromised and/or kidney-transplanted patients. For 99.9 % of the specimens, there was no difference in the interpretation of results.

Twenty hours of incubation did not have any negative effect on the detection of uropathogens.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.001104
2019-12-02
2019-12-11
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.001104/jmm001104.html?itemId=/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.001104&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Hilt EE, McKinley K, Pearce MM, Rosenfeld AB, Zilliox MJ et al. Urine is not sterile: use of enhanced urine culture techniques to detect resident bacterial flora in the adult female bladder. J Clin Microbiol 2014;52: 871– 876 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Murray P, Traynor P, Hopson D. Evaluation of microbiological processing of urine specimens: comparison of overnight versus two-day incubation. J Clin Microbiol 1992;30: 1600– 1601
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Joho KL, Soliman H, Weinstein MP. Comparison of one-day versus two-day incubation of urine cultures. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 1995;21: 55– 56 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Klein S, Nurjadi D, Horner S, Heeg K, Zimmermann S et al. Significant increase in cultivation of Gardnerella vaginalis, Alloscardovia omnicolens, Actinotignum schaalii, and Actinomyces spp. in urine samples with total laboratory automation. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2018;37: 1305– 1311 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Graham JC, Galloway A. Acp best practice no 167: the laboratory diagnosis of urinary tract infection. J Clin Pathol 2001;54: 911– 919 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Kline KA, Lewis AL, Uropathogens G-P. Gram-Positive uropathogens, polymicrobial urinary tract infection, and the emerging microbiota of the urinary tract. Microbiol Spectr 2016;4: [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  7. England PH. 2019; Uk standards for microbiology investigations. investigation of urine. B41. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/smi-b-41-investigation-of-urine
  8. Franz M, Hörl WH. Common errors in diagnosis and management of urinary tract infection. I: pathophysiology and diagnostic techniques. Nephrol Dial Transplant 1999;14: 2746– 2753 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Imirzalioglu C, Hain T, Chakraborty T, Domann E. Hidden pathogens uncovered: metagenomic analysis of urinary tract infections. Andrologia 2008;40: 66– 71 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. López-Medrano F, García-Bravo M, Morales JM, Andrés A, San Juan R et al. Urinary tract infection due to Corynebacterium urealyticum in kidney transplant recipients: an underdiagnosed etiology for obstructive uropathy and graft dysfunction-results of a prospective cohort study. Clin Infect Dis 2008;46: 825– 830 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Gyssens IC, Kern WV, Livermore DM. The role of antibiotic stewardship in limiting antibacterial resistance among hematology patients. Haematologica 2013;98: 1821– 1825 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.001104
Loading
/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.001104
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplements

Supplementary material 1

PDF
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error