Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Int Urogynecol J. 2018 Feb;29(2):205-210. doi: 10.1007/s00192-017-3528-8. Epub 2017 Dec 26.

Urine trouble: should we think differently about UTI?

Author information

1
Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Stritch School of Medicine, Loyola University Chicago, Maywood, IL, USA.
2
Department of Urology, Center for Female Pelvic Health, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
3
Departments of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Urology, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL, USA.
4
Department of Reproductive Medicine, Division of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA. librubaker@ucsd.edu.
5
Division of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Reproductive Medicine, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA. librubaker@ucsd.edu.

Abstract

Urinary tract infection (UTI) is clinically important, given that it is one of the most common bacterial infections in adult women. However, the current understanding of UTI remains based on a now disproven concept that the urinary bladder is sterile. Thus, current standards for UTI diagnosis have significant limitations that may reduce the opportunity to improve patient care. Using data from our work and numerous other peer-reviewed studies, we identified four major limitations to the contemporary UTI description: the language of UTI, UTI diagnostic testing, the Escherichia coli-centric view of UTI, and the colony-forming units (CFU) threshold-based diagnosis. Contemporary methods and technology, combined with continued rigorous clinical research can be used to correct these limitations.

KEYWORDS:

Diagnostics; Escherichia coli; Microbiome; Pathogens; Urinalysis; Urinary tract infection

PMID:
29279968
DOI:
10.1007/s00192-017-3528-8
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Springer
Loading ...
Support Center