Urine Contamination Prevalence Using a Midstream Collection Device Compared with Clean Voided Collections in Dogs

Area of Science:

• Veterinary Medicine
• Urology
• Diagnostic Microbiology

Background:

• Minimally invasive urine collection is preferred, but contamination is common.
• Urine contamination can occur from the urethra and external genitalia during voiding.
• Discarding the initial urine stream is a potential method to reduce contamination.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare the efficacy of a midstream urine collection device (MCD) versus standard clean-caught (SCC) voided urine collection in reducing bacterial and cellular contamination in dogs.
• To evaluate the prevalence of contamination using MCD, SCC, and cystocentesis (CYS) techniques.

Main Methods:

• A descriptive cross-sectional study involving urine collection from dogs.
• Three urine collection techniques were employed: standard clean-caught (SCC), midstream collection device (MCD), and cystocentesis (CYS).
• Urinalysis and aerobic urine culture were performed, with prevalence described using percentages and confidence intervals.

Main Results:

• Positive urine culture prevalence did not differ significantly between SCC and MCD (P = .099).
• Cystocentesis (CYS) demonstrated significantly lower positive urine culture prevalence compared to both SCC (P < .001) and MCD (P = .009).
• No significant difference in other urinalysis variables was observed between SCC and MCD.

Conclusions:

• The midstream urine collection device (MCD) offers no significant advantage over the standard clean-caught (SCC) technique for reducing contamination in canine urine samples.
• Both SCC and MCD are suitable alternatives to cystocentesis (CYS) when CYS is not feasible.
• Clinicians should exercise caution when interpreting results from SCC and MCD due to a higher likelihood of bacterial contamination compared to CYS.