POSTOPERATIVE INFECTIOUS COMPLICATIONS IN PATIENTS WITH URINARY DISEASE

The large proportion of postoperative infectious complications in urological hospitals makes extremely urgent the problem of its control. The high level of these complications in the postoperative period in patients with urolithiasis is caused by various endo- and exogenous factors.

Purpose. To determine the frequency, structure, and features of postoperative infectious complications in patients with urolithiasis in urological hospitals.

Materials and methods. As an object of research we used a medical card 232 of the operated patients with urolithiasis, which were copied out in individual registration card. Of 232 patients with urolithiasis 48.3% were men, their average age was 44.5 ± 9.4 years. Female patients were slightly larger (51.7%), respectively, the average age was 44.9 ± 8.1 years.

Results. The most common postoperative infectious complications in urolithiasis was infection in the area of surgical intervention (36,2%), acute urethritis (20,7%), acute pyelonephritis (14.7 per cent), paranephritis (9,5%), acute orhoepididimit (7,8%), acute cystitis (6%), pionephrosis (3,4%), urosepsis (1.7 percent). In the etiological structure of infectious agents associated with medical care with the highest frequency, microorganisms of genera Escherichia coli (43%), Proteus (9.5%), Staphilococcus spp were isolated. (8.3%) and Staphilococcus aureus (8.3%), and in 11.9% of cases, the Association of microorganisms. Analysis of the etiological structure of genera of the family Enterobacteriaceae resistant to β-lactam antibiotics showed that 63.2% of the amount to the genus strain of E. coli, 21% Proteus and 15.8% Klebsiella.

Conclusion. The data obtained indicate the need for research on the prevalence of resistant strains of microorganisms, the introduction of more specifi c, sensitive methods and monitoring. This will increase the effectiveness of treatment, reduce the risk of the spread of resistant strains and increase nosocomial infections.

1. Marschang S, Bernardo G. Prevention and control of healthcare-associated infection in Europe: a review of patients’ perspectives and existing differences. J Hosp Infect. 2015 Apr;89 (4):357–62. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhin.2015.01.017.

2. Nicolle Urinary tract in geriatric and institutionalized patients. Current Opinion in Urology. Curr Opin Urol. 2002 Jan;12 (1):51–5.

3. Naber KG, Bergman B, Bishop MC, Bjerklund-Johansen TE, Botto H, Lobel B, et al. Guidelines on urinary and male genital tract infections. Eur Urol. 2001 Nov;40 (5):576–88.

4. European Association of Urology. Urological Infections. Available at: http://uroweb.org/guideline/urological-infections/2015

5. Liselotte Diaz Hogberg, Klaus Weist, Carl Suetens, Jolanta Griskeviciene DM, O. H. ECDC Surveillance Report. Annual epidemiological report Antimicrobial resistance and healthcare-associated infections. 2014, p. 1–23.

6. Akilov FA, Mukhtarov ShT, Giyasov ShI, Mirkhamidov DKh, Nasirov FR, Muratova NB. Postoperative infectious-inflammatory complications of endoscopic surgery for urolithiasis. Urology. 2013;1:89–91. (In Russian).

7. Lopatkin NA, Apolikhin OI, Pushkar’ DYu, et al. Russian national recommendations «Antimicrobial therapy and prevention of infections of the kidneys, urinary tract and male genital organs». Moscow, 2014. (In Russian).

8. Loveday HP, Wilson JA, Pratt RJ, Golsorkhi M, Tingle A, Bak A, et al. National evidence-based guidelines for preventing healthcare-associated infections in NHS hospitals in England. J Hosp Infect. 2014 Jan;86 Suppl 1: S1–70. DOI: 10.1016/S0195–6701(13)60012–2.

9. Dzeranov NK. Urinary tract infection in patients with large and coral stones. Proceedings of XII Congress of the Russian Society of Urologists. Мoscow, 2012, pp. 130–131. (In Russian).

10. Usupbaev ACh, Mamatbekov RA, Isaev NA. The current situation of problems of urolithiasis in the Kyrgyz Republic. Vestnik KGMA im. I. K. Akhunbaeva. 2017;3:101–111. (In Russian).

11. Daburov KN, Sadulloev FS, Nusratulloev IN. Features of microbial contamination in the departments of the urological hospital with the improvement of measures to reduce them. Proceedings of the XI Conference of young medical scientists of CIS countries. Almaty, 2011, pp. 20–23. (In Russian).

12. Shulutko B. I. Nefrologiya 2002. Sovremennoe sostoyanie problemy [Nephrology 2002. The current state of the problem]. St.Petersburg: «Renkor» Publ., 2002. (In Russian).

13. Daburov KN, Sadulloev FS, Nusratulloev IN. Epidemiology of hospital-acquired infections in urological hospital. Proceedings of the Congress of urologists of Kazakhstan and the Eurasian andrology Congress. Almaty, 2010, pp. 88–89. (In Russian).

14. Gerasimenko AV, Chumakov ME. Experience of introducing the system of infection (epidemiologic) safety in SBHI of the Republic of Mordovia «Mordovian Republican Clinical Perinatal Center». MediAl. 2014;3 (13):62–65. (In Russian).

15. Kalsi J, Arya M, Wilson P, Mundy A. Hospital-acquired urinary tract infection. Int J Clin Pract. 2003 Jun;57 (5):388–91.

16. Pushkarev AM. Faktory razvitiya gospital’noi infektsii mochevykh putei v posleoperatsionnom periode. Zdravookhranenie Bashkortostana. 2001;5:118–22. (In Russian).

17. Usupbaev ACh, Kabaev BA, Usupbaeva AA, Imankulova AS, Sadyrbekov NZh. Perioperative antibioticoprophylactocs in urological practice. Vestnik KGMA Vestnik KGMA im. I. K. Akhunbaeva. 2017;3:172–6. (In Russian).