| Title |
Prevalence of upper urinary tract anomalies in hospitalized premature infants with urinary tract infection
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Perinatology, December 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1038/jp.2014.209 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
A Vachharajani, G J Vricella, T Najaf, D E Coplen |
| Abstract |
Objective:The 2011 American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) guidelines address imaging after initial febrile urinary tract infection (UTI) in infants >2 months of age. We sought to determine the frequency of upper urinary tract anomalies (hydronephrosis and vesicoureteral reflux (VUR)) in hospitalized premature infants with UTI.Study design:We retrospectively reviewed the electronic medical records of neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admissions at a tertiary care children's hospital between 1 January 2006 and 31 December 2010. We queried the records for UTI, renal ultrasound (US) and voiding cystourethrogram (VCUG).Result:We identified 3518 unique admissions. UTI occurred in 118 infants (3%). Sixty-nine (60%) had a normal US. Renal dilation was predominantly renal pelvic dilation (12%) and isolated caliectasis (22%). VUR was identified in 15 (14%) infants evaluated with a VCUG. VUR was identified in nine (12%) infants without and in seven (16%) with an abnormality on US. Reflux was identified in 7% of male and 38% of female infants with a UTI.Conclusion:Anatomic abnormalities of the upper urinary tract are uncommon in premature infants with a UTI that occurs during neonatal hospitalization. In concordance with the AAP guidelines, a VCUG may not be required in all NICU infants under age 2 months after a single UTI.Journal of Perinatology advance online publication, 4 December 2014; doi:10.1038/jp.2014.209. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 36 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 17% |
| Researcher | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 17% |
| Unknown | 10 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 58% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 6% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 3% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 11 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 December 2014.
All research outputs
#4,168,073
of 22,772,779 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Perinatology
#737
of 2,646 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,873
of 360,775 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Perinatology
#31
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,772,779 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,646 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 360,775 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.