This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

William Lane M. Robson, MD, FRCPC, MRCP(Glasg), FRSH
Department of Pediatric Nephrology The Children's Hospital 890 W Faris Rd Suite 250, Box 1 Greenville, SC 29605-4253

Alexander K. C. Leung, MBBS, FRCP(Edin), FRCPC
Calgary, Alberta

Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1995;149(9):1042.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

The well-designed study by Schlager et al¹ in the February issue of the ARCHIVES demonstrated that the periurethral area was colonized with a potential urinary pathogen in 20 (20%) of 98 newborns. The periurethral area was colonized only in female and uncircumcised male newborns; none of the circumcised male newborns had positive periurethral swab cultures. Whenever the periurethral area was colonized, a urine specimen obtained by bag technique grew the same bacteria.¹

Some readers might infer from this study that a bag urine specimen is unreliable for the diagnosis of urinary tract infection (UTI). What Schlager et al² have shown is that when the clinical suspicion of UTI is low—such as in the newborn period, when the symptoms of UTI are often nonspecific—a bag specimen has a high rate of false-positive results. When the clinical suspicion of UTI is low, a suprapubic aspiration or in-and-out catheter might . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?