Submit a comment
Abstract
BACKGROUND Catheterization facilitates continuous bacteriuria, for which the clinical significance remains unclear. This study aimed to determine the clinical presentation, epidemiology, and dynamics of bacteriuria in a cohort of long-term catheterized nursing home residents.METHODS Prospective urine culture, urinalysis, chart review, and assessment of signs and symptoms of infection were performed weekly for 19 study participants over 7 months. All bacteria ≥ 1 × 103 cfu/mL were cultured, isolated, identified, and tested for susceptibility to select antimicrobials.RESULTS In total, 226 of the 234 urine samples were polymicrobial (97%), with an average of 4.7 isolates per weekly specimen. A total of 228 urine samples (97%) exhibited ≥ 1 × 106 CFU/mL, 220 (94%) exhibited abnormal urinalysis, 126 (54%) were associated with at least 1 possible sign or symptom of infection, and 82 (35%) would potentially meet a standardized definition of catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI), but only 3 had a caregiver diagnosis of CAUTI. Bacterial isolates (286; 30%) were resistant to a tested antimicrobial agent, and bacteriuria composition was remarkably stable despite a combined total of 54 catheter changes and 23 weeks of antimicrobial use.CONCLUSION Bacteriuria composition was largely polymicrobial, including persistent colonization by organisms previously considered to be urine culture contaminants. Neither antimicrobial use nor catheter changes sterilized the urine, at most resulting in transient reductions in bacterial burden followed by new acquisition of resistant isolates. Thus, this patient population exhibits a high prevalence of bacteriuria coupled with potential indicators of infection, necessitating further exploration to identify sensitive markers of true infection.FUNDING This work was supported by the NIH (R00 DK105205, R01 DK123158, UL1 TR001412).
Authors
Chelsie E. Armbruster, Aimee L. Brauer, Monica S. Humby, Jiahui Shao, Saptarshi Chakraborty
Guidelines
The Editorial Board will only consider comments that are deemed relevant and of interest to readers. The Journal will not post data that have not been subjected to peer review; or a comment that is essentially a reiteration of another comment.
- Comments appear on the Journal’s website and are linked from the original article’s web page.
- Authors are notified by email if their comments are posted.
- The Journal reserves the right to edit comments for length and clarity.
- No appeals will be considered.
- Comments are not indexed in PubMed.
Specific requirements
- Maximum length, 400 words
- Entered as plain text or HTML
- Author’s name and email address, to be posted with the comment
- Declaration of all potential conflicts of interest (even if these are not ultimately posted); see the Journal’s conflict-of-interest policy
- Comments may not include figures
