Is a second urine specimen necessary for the diagnosis of asymptomatic bacteriuria?

S. E. Geerlings; E. C. Brouwer; W. Gaastra; A. I. Hoepelman

doi:https://doi.org/10.1086/314038

Is a second urine specimen necessary for the diagnosis of asymptomatic bacteriuria?

S. E. Geerlings, E. C. Brouwer, W. Gaastra, A. I. Hoepelman

Other Departments

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

14 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

By use of pulse-field gel electrophoresis, we evaluated the molecular identity of 32 Escherichia coli isolates obtained in 2 consecutive urine cultures from 16 patients as part of a large study of asymptomatic bacteriuria in diabetic women and found different E. coli isolates in 7 of 16 patients, meaning that nearly half (44%) of the patients who had been previously classified as having asymptomatic bacteriuria were reinfected with a different strain

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	E3-E4
Journal	Clinical Infectious Diseases
Volume	31
Issue number	3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1086/314038
Publication status	Published - 2000

Access to Document

https://doi.org/10.1086/314038

Cite this

@article{3add001374b94a38b0281699428e8ca8,

title = "Is a second urine specimen necessary for the diagnosis of asymptomatic bacteriuria?",

abstract = "By use of pulse-field gel electrophoresis, we evaluated the molecular identity of 32 Escherichia coli isolates obtained in 2 consecutive urine cultures from 16 patients as part of a large study of asymptomatic bacteriuria in diabetic women and found different E. coli isolates in 7 of 16 patients, meaning that nearly half (44%) of the patients who had been previously classified as having asymptomatic bacteriuria were reinfected with a different strain",

author = "Geerlings, {S. E.} and Brouwer, {E. C.} and W. Gaastra and Hoepelman, {A. I.}",

year = "2000",

doi = "https://doi.org/10.1086/314038",

language = "English",

volume = "31",

pages = "E3--E4",

journal = "Clinical Infectious Diseases",

issn = "1058-4838",