Search

International audience; Objective: To report the nature, diagnosis and therapeutic strategy of infectious emergencies in urology.Material and methods: Bibliographic research from Pubmed, Embase, and Google scholar in July 2021. A synthesis of the guidelines of national infectious diseases societies.Results: Urosepsis and complicated urinary tract infection have a standardized definition. Diagnosis and therapeutic strategy are presented for upper tract urinary infection, male urinary infection, healthcare associated urinary infection, symptomatic canduria and urinary infections of the elderly. Appropriate antibiotherapy should be tailored to the degree of severity, bacterial ecosystem, patient characteristics et localization of the infection.Conclusion: Urinary infections can be critical and require immediate care. Knowledge of the guidelines and of appropriate diagnosis and therapeutics strategy improve care which should be rapidly applied, and collegial.; ObjectifRapporter la nature, les stratégies diagnostiques et thérapeutiques des urgences infectieuses en urologie.Matériel et méthodeRecherche bibliographique à partir de Pubmed, Embase et Google Scholar en juillet 2021. Synthèse des recommandations nationales du comité d’infectiologie de l’AFU (CIAFU) et de la Société de Pathologies Infectieuses de Langue Française (SPILF).RésultatsL’urosepsis et sepsis urinaire grave répondent à des critères diagnostiques stricts. La prise en charge infectieuse diagnostique et thérapeutique des pyélonéphrites graves, infections urinaires masculines graves, infections urinaires associées aux soins, candiduries symptomatiques et infections urinaires chez la personne âgée sont décrites. L’antibiothérapie doit être adaptée à la gravité, l’écologie bactérienne, aux particularités du patient et au site d’infection.ConclusionLes infections urinaires peuvent être graves et nécessitent une prise en charge en urgence. La connaissance des recommandations et des stratégies diagnostiques et thérapeutiques adaptées aux diverses présentations permet une optimisation de la prise en charge qui doit être la plus rapide possible, et collégiale.

Summary Introduction No recent national guidelines exist regarding the management of urinary tract infections (UTIs) in the presence of ureteral stent. This situation could lead to discrepancies in clinical management and less opportunity for a favorable patient's outcome. Methods All available data published on Medline® between 1998 and 2018 were systematically searched and reviewed. All papers assessing adult patients carrying ureteral stent were included for analysis. After studies critical analysis, national guidelines for clinical management were elaborated in order to answer clinical questions. Results A total of 451 articles were identified, of which 58 have been included. The prevalence of urinary tract infections in the presence of ureteral stent remains unknown. After 3 months, all endo-ureteral devices were colonized on microbiological study. These patients also presented a positive urine culture in 25 to 70% of the cases, often polymicrobial. Staphylococci, E. coli, Klebsiella, Pseudomonas, Enterococcus and Candida were the commonest micro-organisms responsible for urinary colonization or infection. The risk of UTI on endo-ureteral devices seemed higher the longer it stayed implanted. There is no justification in the literature to recommend a systematic change of endo-ureteral devices following a urinary tract infection. Discussion The existing literature is rich but of poor methodological quality, and therefore does not allow to draw robust conclusions. The greatest difficulty faced in this work was to accurately differentiate urinary colonizations from true infections, including clinical symptoms and not only microbiological results. Conclusion These guidelines propose a standardized management of such common clinical situations. Well-designed studies are needed to upgrade the level of evidence of these guidelines.