Stented ureterovesical anastomosis in renal transplantation: does it influence the rate of urinary tract infections?

Objective

Our objective was to evaluate the impact of routine use of double-J stents on the incidence of urinary tract infection after renal transplantation.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective-comparative single-centre study in 310 consecutive adult deceased donor kidney recipients transplanted from 2002 to 2006. Patients were divided in two groups, with or without urinary stent implantation. To evaluate the predictive factors for UTI, donor and recipients pre- and post-transplantation data were analysed. Early urological complications and renal function within 12 months of transplantation were included as well.

Results

A total of 157 patients were enrolled to a stent (ST) and 153 patients to a no-stent (NST) group. The rate of urinary tract infection at three months was similar between the two groups (43.3% ST vs. 40.1% NST, p = 0.65). Of the identified pathogens Enterococcus and Escherichia coli were the most common species. In multivariate analysis neither age nor immunosuppressive agents, BMI or diabetes seemed to have influence on the rate of UTI. When compared to males, females had a significantly higher risk for UTI (54.0% vs. 33.5%).

Conclusion

Prophylactic stenting of the ureterovesical anastomosis does not increase the risk of urinary tract infection in the early postoperative period.     

Management of type 2 diabetes mellitus: is it in accordance with the guidelines?

A cross-sectional study was conducted among 517 patients with diabetes mellitus at all health centres in Melaka Tengah District to examine whether these patients and their associated cardiovascular risk factors were managed according to current guidelines. All patients had Type 2 diabetes mellitus with mean age of 57.9 +/- 10.5 years and the mean duration of diabetes was 7.2 +/- 6.0 years. The glycaemic control was poor with 53.6% of the patients having HbAlc above 8% (mean = 8.5%) and 24% of them had microalbuminuria. Among these patients with poor glycaemic control, about 47.6% of them were on monotherapy. Three hundred and fifty (67.7%) patients had hypertension but only 11 (3.1%) achieved target blood pressure of less than 130/80 mmHg. Only 18.3% of the diabetics with hypertension were prescribed angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and 0.3% with angiotensin receptor blockers. Nearly two-third of them had low-density lipoprotein cholesterol greater than 2.6 mmol/l (mean = 3.4 mmol/l) but only 6.8% were prescribed lipid-lowering agents. Aspirin was prescribed to 8.2% of diabetics aged above 40 years. Sixteen percent of the patients smoked, 53% did not do any exercise, and the mean BMI was 26.8 kg/mn. The management of diabetes mellitus and its associated cardiovascular risk factors was suboptimal on the basis of current clinical guidelines. A greater effort in educating doctors in the health centres about these management and adherence to the guidelines is important in reducing patients' risk of cardiovascular disease and its associated morbidity and mortality.