Is urethral microscopy useful in symptomatic male patients without urethral discharge?. (January 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Borg, S; Daniel, J; Forsyth, S
• Is Part Of: International journal of STD & AIDS. Volume 30:Number 1(2019)
• Page Start: 79
• Page End: 81
• Publication Date: 2019-01
• Subjects: Bacterial disease -- gonorrhea (Neisseria gonorrhoeae) -- non-gonococcal urethritis -- urethritis (bacterial) -- urethritis (non-specific); Sexually transmitted diseases -- Periodicals; AIDS (Disease) -- Periodicals; 616.951
• DOI: 10.1177/0956462418793511
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0956-4624

Abstract

National guidelines recommend that male patients presenting with symptoms of urethritis or epididymo-orchitis undergo a urethral swab for microscopy. However, this is resource intensive. The aim of this audit was to determine the proportion of symptomatic patients without urethral discharge who have positive findings on urethral swab microscopy and explore associations between presenting symptoms and microscopy findings. We conducted a retrospective audit of symptomatic male patients who underwent microscopy. There was a significant difference between the percentage of symptomatic patients with positive findings on microscopy in those with and without urethral discharge (67% vs 33%, p < 0.001). In a patient presenting with symptoms other than urethral discharge, the likelihood that positive findings on microscopy would occur in a patient with dysuria was 4.73 times more likely than if they did not have dysuria, when controlling for age, testicular pain or discomfort, and urethral discomfort or penile irritation (p < 0.01). In situations where there are limited resources, patients without urethral discharge presenting with dysuria could be prioritised. However, further research is required to identify and stratify which patients require microscopy.