Diversity of bacteria causing urinary tract infections: research results and recommended clinical approaches

DOI 10.33861/2071-8020-2021-4-37-40

Aksenchik M.A., Redkina N.N., Konyaev S.V.

Summary. Bacteria in urine can cause both infections of the ureters, bladder and urethra, and bacteriuria, without any clinical and laboratory signs of infectious and inflammatory urological diseases. Bacterial urinary tract infections occur in approximately 14% of dogs throughout their lives, with an increased prevalence in older animals. In cats younger than 10 years of age, bacterial urinary tract infections are rare, affecting only 1-8% of the population. Urinary tract infections are more common in older animals and in cats with chronic kidney disease. Successful treatment of urinary tract infections begins with an accurate diagnosis and classification of the infection using quantitative and qualitative assessments of urine cultures, which allows the selection of the appropriate antibiotic and its regimen. Urine culture is necessary to confirm or exclude urinary tract infection, select rational and adequate antibiotic therapy, control treatment and reduce the risk of developing antibiotic resistance. The authors analyzed the frequency of occurrence of positive urine cultures from dogs and cats, described the range of microorganisms encountered, which are an etiotropic factor in urinary tract infections in pets. The most characteristic isolate was Escherichia coli in 37% of cases in cats and 46.2% in dogs. The most common were also in cats Enterococcus faecalis (16.9%), Enterococcus faecium (9.7%), Staphylococcus felis (8.3%), Proteus mirabilis (4.5%); in dogs - Proteus mirabilis (17.3%), Staphylococcus pseudintermedius (10.4%), Enterococcus faecalis (7.2%). Also, basic recommendations are given on the clinical approach to diagnosing urinary tract infections and assessing the results of bacteriological studies.

Keywords: small pets, cats, dogs, urinary tract infections, bacteria, species diversity of microorganisms, bacteriological research, urine culture, etiotropic factor, antibiotic therapy.

References:

1-15. Vide supra.

Author affiliation:

Aksenchik Mikhail A., head of the technological department of the VET UNION veterinary laboratory; 33 bldg., 1, Nagatinskaya st., Moscow, 117105; phone: 8-985-6615750 (int. 1661); e-mail: maksyonchik@vetunion.ru.

Redkina Natalya N., doctor of visual diagnostics, therapist (nephrologist/ urologist) of the Belyi Klyk Veterinary clinic; 2 bldg., 6/2, Krasnaya Presnya st., Moscow, 123242; phone: 8-495-9270077.

Responsible for correspondence with the editorial board: Konyaev Sergey V., Ph.D. in Biology, scientific researcher of the Institute of Systematics and Ecology of Animals of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, head of the scientific and educational department of the VET UNION veterinary laboratory (Moscow); 11, Frunze st., Novosibirsk, 630091; phone: 8-913-7654567; e-mail: s.konyaev@yahoo.com.