Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Urine test results in dogs with and without cleaning before sample
By Mandese, W W et al.Ā·Published in The Journal of small animal practiceĀ·2024Ā·Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, United StatesĀ·View original on PubMed ā
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research ā every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work ā
Original publication title: Urinalysis and culture results of free-catch urine samples in dogs: a randomised controlled trial.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A study looked at urine samples from 100 dogs to see how often bacteria were present, comparing samples collected using a cleaning method versus those collected without any prep. The results showed that male dogs were almost five times more likely to have significant bacterial growth in their urine compared to females, but the cleaning method didn't seem to make a difference. For most dogs without symptoms of a urinary tract infection, the urine collection method didn't lead to significant bacterial findings. This suggests that bacteria in these samples might come from contamination rather than an actual infection.
People also search for: dog urine test results Ā· dog urinary tract infection symptoms Ā· male dog urine bacteria Ā· how to collect dog urine sample
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the prevalence of bacterial presence in free-catch urine samples preceded by either a standardised prepped ("clean-catch") protocol versus unprepped (non-cleaned) voiding. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was a single-centre prospective single-blinded randomised controlled trial. Urine samples were obtained from 100 client-owned dogs presenting for routine evaluation. Dogs were randomly assigned to either the prepped group (preputial or peri-vulvar area cleaned with sterile saline before collection) or the unprepped group (no preliminary cleansing) stratified by sex. Urinalysis and urine culture (blood and MacConkey agar) were performed on all samples. Significant bacterial presence on urine culture was defined as >10 colony forming units (CFU)/mL. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant associations between prepped versus unprepped collection method or sex with a urinalysis positive for bacteriuria. However, on culture, significant bacterial growth was almost five times more likely to be associated with males relative to females (odds ratio 4.59, 95% confidence interval 1.61 to 13.10). The probability of finding a positive culture was not statistically associated with prep method (odds ratio 1.43, 95% confidence interval 0.50 to 4.08). CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: For the majority of dogs without clinical signs of urinary tract infection, free-catch urine collection does not result in significant bacteriuria found on analysis or culture. The presence of bacteria found in free-catch samples may be secondary to sample contamination or subclinical bacteriuria. Sample contamination or subclinical bacteriuria may be more prevalent in male dogs.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases āOriginal publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38622928/