Asymptomatic bacteriuria and urinary tract infection in pregnant women with and without diabetes: Cohort study

Caroline Schneeberger; Jan Jaap H.M. Erwich; Edwin R. van den Heuvel; Ben W.J. Mol; Alewijn Ott; Suzanne E. Geerlings

doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2017.12.013

Asymptomatic bacteriuria and urinary tract infection in pregnant women with and without diabetes: Cohort study

Caroline Schneeberger^*, Jan Jaap H.M. Erwich, Edwin R. van den Heuvel, Ben W.J. Mol, Alewijn Ott, Suzanne E. Geerlings

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

18 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To compare the prevalence of asymptomatic bacteriuria (ASB) and the incidence of urinary tract infection (UTI) in pregnant women with and without diabetes mellitus (DM) or gestational DM (GDM). Study design: We performed a cohort study in five hospitals and two midwifery clinics in the Netherlands. Pregnant women with and without DM or GDM were screened for the presence of ASB around 12 and 32 weeks’ gestation. Characteristics of participants as well as outcome data were collected from questionnaires and medical records. ASB was defined as the growth of at least 10e5 cfu/ml isolated from the urine of a woman without UTI complaints. UTI was considered to be present when a treating physician had diagnosed UTI and prescribed antibiotics. Results: We studied 202 women with and 272 women without DM or GDM. Of all women 31.7% with and 94.9% without DM or GDM provided a week 12 sample. The prevalence of ASB was comparable in women with and without DM or GDM (12 weeks’ n = 322; 4.7% and 2.3%; relative risk (RR) 2.02; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52–7.84; 32 weeks’ n = 422; 3.2% and 3.0%; RR 1.06; 95% CI 0.36–3.09), as was the incidence of UTI (16.8% and 12.9%; RR 1.31; 95% CI 0.85–2.02). Neither ASB nor UTI were associated with preterm birth or babies being small for gestational age. Conclusion: In pregnant women with and women without DM or GDM, the overall prevalence of ASB was low. Neither ASB nor UTI did differ significantly between the groups. Our data discourage a routine ASB screen and treat policy in pregnant women with DM or GDM.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	176-181
Number of pages	6
Journal	European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology
Volume	222
Early online date	7 Dec 2017
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2017.12.013
Publication status	Published - Mar 2018

Bibliographical note

Funding
UMCG, Groningen, the Netherlands.

Acknowledgements
We would like to thank all participating laboratories (department of Medical Microbiology of Certe in Groningen, Academic Medical Center (AMC) in Amsterdam and Jeroen Bosch hospital (JBZ) in Den Bosch), hospitals (department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of the university medical Centre of Groningen (UMCG) in Groningen, Martini Hospital (MZH) in Groningen, Onze Lieve Vrouwen Gasthuis (OLVG) in Amsterdam, AMC in Amsterdam and JBZ in Den Bosch) and midwifery clinics (‘Verloskundige Stadsprakijk’ (VSP) in Groningen and ‘VIDA’ in Amsterdam) for their contributions to this study, particularly the midwifes, gynaecologists, laboratory analysts, administrative office and all women who participated in this trial. Furthermore we thank the UMCG in Groningen, the Netherlands for their financial support.

Keywords

Asymptomatic bacteriuria
Diabetes mellitus
Pregnancy
Urinary tract infection

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1016/j.ejogrb.2017.12.013Licence: Unspecified

Cite this

@article{c58c20f081a7459a81109f472278c9a1,

title = "Asymptomatic bacteriuria and urinary tract infection in pregnant women with and without diabetes: Cohort study",

abstract = "Objective: To compare the prevalence of asymptomatic bacteriuria (ASB) and the incidence of urinary tract infection (UTI) in pregnant women with and without diabetes mellitus (DM) or gestational DM (GDM). Study design: We performed a cohort study in five hospitals and two midwifery clinics in the Netherlands. Pregnant women with and without DM or GDM were screened for the presence of ASB around 12 and 32 weeks{\textquoteright} gestation. Characteristics of participants as well as outcome data were collected from questionnaires and medical records. ASB was defined as the growth of at least 10e5 cfu/ml isolated from the urine of a woman without UTI complaints. UTI was considered to be present when a treating physician had diagnosed UTI and prescribed antibiotics. Results: We studied 202 women with and 272 women without DM or GDM. Of all women 31.7% with and 94.9% without DM or GDM provided a week 12 sample. The prevalence of ASB was comparable in women with and without DM or GDM (12 weeks{\textquoteright} n = 322; 4.7% and 2.3%; relative risk (RR) 2.02; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52–7.84; 32 weeks{\textquoteright} n = 422; 3.2% and 3.0%; RR 1.06; 95% CI 0.36–3.09), as was the incidence of UTI (16.8% and 12.9%; RR 1.31; 95% CI 0.85–2.02). Neither ASB nor UTI were associated with preterm birth or babies being small for gestational age. Conclusion: In pregnant women with and women without DM or GDM, the overall prevalence of ASB was low. Neither ASB nor UTI did differ significantly between the groups. Our data discourage a routine ASB screen and treat policy in pregnant women with DM or GDM.",

keywords = "Asymptomatic bacteriuria, Diabetes mellitus, Pregnancy, Urinary tract infection",

author = "Caroline Schneeberger and Erwich, {Jan Jaap H.M.} and {van den Heuvel}, {Edwin R.} and Mol, {Ben W.J.} and Alewijn Ott and Geerlings, {Suzanne E.}",

note = "Funding UMCG, Groningen, the Netherlands. Acknowledgements We would like to thank all participating laboratories (department of Medical Microbiology of Certe in Groningen, Academic Medical Center (AMC) in Amsterdam and Jeroen Bosch hospital (JBZ) in Den Bosch), hospitals (department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of the university medical Centre of Groningen (UMCG) in Groningen, Martini Hospital (MZH) in Groningen, Onze Lieve Vrouwen Gasthuis (OLVG) in Amsterdam, AMC in Amsterdam and JBZ in Den Bosch) and midwifery clinics ({\textquoteleft}Verloskundige Stadsprakijk{\textquoteright} (VSP) in Groningen and {\textquoteleft}VIDA{\textquoteright} in Amsterdam) for their contributions to this study, particularly the midwifes, gynaecologists, laboratory analysts, administrative office and all women who participated in this trial. Furthermore we thank the UMCG in Groningen, the Netherlands for their financial support.",

year = "2018",

month = mar,

doi = "10.1016/j.ejogrb.2017.12.013",

language = "English",

volume = "222",

pages = "176--181",

journal = "European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology",

issn = "0301-2115",

publisher = "Elsevier Ireland Ltd",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Asymptomatic bacteriuria and urinary tract infection in pregnant women with and without diabetes

T2 - Cohort study

AU - Schneeberger, Caroline

AU - Erwich, Jan Jaap H.M.

AU - van den Heuvel, Edwin R.

AU - Mol, Ben W.J.

AU - Ott, Alewijn

AU - Geerlings, Suzanne E.

N1 - Funding UMCG, Groningen, the Netherlands. Acknowledgements We would like to thank all participating laboratories (department of Medical Microbiology of Certe in Groningen, Academic Medical Center (AMC) in Amsterdam and Jeroen Bosch hospital (JBZ) in Den Bosch), hospitals (department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of the university medical Centre of Groningen (UMCG) in Groningen, Martini Hospital (MZH) in Groningen, Onze Lieve Vrouwen Gasthuis (OLVG) in Amsterdam, AMC in Amsterdam and JBZ in Den Bosch) and midwifery clinics (‘Verloskundige Stadsprakijk’ (VSP) in Groningen and ‘VIDA’ in Amsterdam) for their contributions to this study, particularly the midwifes, gynaecologists, laboratory analysts, administrative office and all women who participated in this trial. Furthermore we thank the UMCG in Groningen, the Netherlands for their financial support.

PY - 2018/3

Y1 - 2018/3

N2 - Objective: To compare the prevalence of asymptomatic bacteriuria (ASB) and the incidence of urinary tract infection (UTI) in pregnant women with and without diabetes mellitus (DM) or gestational DM (GDM). Study design: We performed a cohort study in five hospitals and two midwifery clinics in the Netherlands. Pregnant women with and without DM or GDM were screened for the presence of ASB around 12 and 32 weeks’ gestation. Characteristics of participants as well as outcome data were collected from questionnaires and medical records. ASB was defined as the growth of at least 10e5 cfu/ml isolated from the urine of a woman without UTI complaints. UTI was considered to be present when a treating physician had diagnosed UTI and prescribed antibiotics. Results: We studied 202 women with and 272 women without DM or GDM. Of all women 31.7% with and 94.9% without DM or GDM provided a week 12 sample. The prevalence of ASB was comparable in women with and without DM or GDM (12 weeks’ n = 322; 4.7% and 2.3%; relative risk (RR) 2.02; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52–7.84; 32 weeks’ n = 422; 3.2% and 3.0%; RR 1.06; 95% CI 0.36–3.09), as was the incidence of UTI (16.8% and 12.9%; RR 1.31; 95% CI 0.85–2.02). Neither ASB nor UTI were associated with preterm birth or babies being small for gestational age. Conclusion: In pregnant women with and women without DM or GDM, the overall prevalence of ASB was low. Neither ASB nor UTI did differ significantly between the groups. Our data discourage a routine ASB screen and treat policy in pregnant women with DM or GDM.

AB - Objective: To compare the prevalence of asymptomatic bacteriuria (ASB) and the incidence of urinary tract infection (UTI) in pregnant women with and without diabetes mellitus (DM) or gestational DM (GDM). Study design: We performed a cohort study in five hospitals and two midwifery clinics in the Netherlands. Pregnant women with and without DM or GDM were screened for the presence of ASB around 12 and 32 weeks’ gestation. Characteristics of participants as well as outcome data were collected from questionnaires and medical records. ASB was defined as the growth of at least 10e5 cfu/ml isolated from the urine of a woman without UTI complaints. UTI was considered to be present when a treating physician had diagnosed UTI and prescribed antibiotics. Results: We studied 202 women with and 272 women without DM or GDM. Of all women 31.7% with and 94.9% without DM or GDM provided a week 12 sample. The prevalence of ASB was comparable in women with and without DM or GDM (12 weeks’ n = 322; 4.7% and 2.3%; relative risk (RR) 2.02; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52–7.84; 32 weeks’ n = 422; 3.2% and 3.0%; RR 1.06; 95% CI 0.36–3.09), as was the incidence of UTI (16.8% and 12.9%; RR 1.31; 95% CI 0.85–2.02). Neither ASB nor UTI were associated with preterm birth or babies being small for gestational age. Conclusion: In pregnant women with and women without DM or GDM, the overall prevalence of ASB was low. Neither ASB nor UTI did differ significantly between the groups. Our data discourage a routine ASB screen and treat policy in pregnant women with DM or GDM.

KW - Asymptomatic bacteriuria

KW - Diabetes mellitus

KW - Pregnancy

KW - Urinary tract infection

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85042048413&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2017.12.013

DO - 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2017.12.013

M3 - Article

C2 - 29338897

AN - SCOPUS:85042048413

SN - 0301-2115

VL - 222

SP - 176

EP - 181

JO - European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology

JF - European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology

ER -

Asymptomatic bacteriuria and urinary tract infection in pregnant women with and without diabetes: Cohort study

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this