Investigating urinary tract infections in children
BMJ 2013; 346 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.e8654 (Published 30 January 2013) Cite this as: BMJ 2013;346:e8654
This article has a correction. Please see:
- A Davis, radiology specialist trainee year 21,
- B Obi, consultant paediatrician2,
- M Ingram, consultant radiologist2
- 1St George’s Hospital NHS Trust, London SW17 0QT, UK
- 2Royal Surrey County Hospital, Guildford GU2 7XX, UK
- Correspondence to: A Davis adavis{at}bmj.com
- Accepted 13 November 2012
Learning points
The role of imaging is to identify underlying abnormalities that may predispose to urinary tract infection (such as obstruction or vesicoureteric reflux) and possible complications from urinary tract infection (such as renal scarring)
Early imaging should be targeted towards patients most at risk of structural abnormalities or complications, including all children with recurrent urinary tract infection, those aged <3 years with atypical infection, and babies <6 months old with urinary tract infection
This subset includes all children with recurrent infection and children aged <3 years with atypical urinary tract infection
Consider further imaging for babies <6 months old who do not have atypical or recurrent infection but who have an abnormal ultrasound result
Micturating cystography is the gold standard test for detecting vesicoureteric reflux, as the dimercaptosuccinic acid (DMSA) scan is for detecting renal scarring, and each is indicated for specific subgroups
A 5 month old boy presented to his local accident and emergency department with irritability, fever, poor urine output, and foul smelling nappies when they were wet. His mother had had an uncomplicated pregnancy with no abnormalities detected on antenatal ultrasonography. On clinical examination the child looked unwell, with signs of sepsis, including a temperature of 39.8°C and raised C reactive protein and white cell count. A urinary tract infection was confirmed by clean catch mid-stream urine sample. His urine analysis was positive for blood and leucocytes, and Klebsiella was grown in the culture sample. His urine infection was considered atypical because of his septicaemia and infection with a non-Escherichia …
Log in
Log in using your username and password
Log in through your institution
Subscribe from £184 *
Subscribe and get access to all BMJ articles, and much more.
* For online subscription
Access this article for 1 day for:
£50 / $60/ €56 (excludes VAT)
You can download a PDF version for your personal record.