If just “bacteria” are seen on the urinalysis - you have to be very careful in making the leap to the diagnosis of bacterial UTI. Many things look like bacteria in urine sediment that are in fact not real organisms - especially if the are moving, but moving likely by Brownian motion. If the “bacteria” are in association with increased WBC then that is a scenario much more likely to be found with a real bacterial UTI.
So - assuming that the UTI is real (+ Gram stain, + Wright’s Giemsa dry mount stain, large growth quantitative culture in cfu/ml (gold standard), lots of growth on dip paddles) and the dog has NO CLINICAL SIGNS - then the dog’s diagnosis qualifies for an “occult” UTI or as some refer to it as “ABU" - asymptomatic bacterial urinary tract infection. The general consensus that has emerged in both human and veterinary circles would be to NOT treat occult UTI and to watch the patient to see if clinical signs do emerge. If and when clinical signs emerge - treat as for a routine UTI. 9 of 101 dogs in a recent study of “normal” dogs out of the U of Wisconsin vet school were found to have occult UTI - 4 of them persisted for 3 months and 4 were transient (1 was lost to follow-up). None of those 9 dogs developed clinical signs at any time during the 3 months of observation.
Treatment of asymptomatic bacterial urinary tract infections often times results in failure to clear the original organism, and sometimes results in the surviving bugs to have even a higher resistance pattern to antibacterials than before the treatment. An even worse scenario is that the original bug is cleared, but a new organism is now present that is more virulent and now associated with clinical signs.
IN GENERAL - if the dog has a UTI but no clincial signs - it is advisable to watch the animal and see how it plays out. If no clinical signs develop, then withhold treatment. Treat the UTI if and when clinical signs emerge.
If just “bacteria” are seen on the urinalysis - you have to be very careful in making the leap to the diagnosis of bacterial UTI. Many things look like bacteria in urine sediment that are in fact not real organisms - especially if the are moving, but moving likely by Brownian motion. If the “bacteria” are in association with increased WBC then that is a scenario much more likely to be found with a real bacterial UTI.
So - assuming that the UTI is real (+ Gram stain, + Wright’s Giemsa dry mount stain, large growth quantitative culture in cfu/ml (gold standard), lots of growth on dip paddles) and the dog has NO CLINICAL SIGNS - then the dog’s diagnosis qualifies for an “occult” UTI or as some refer to it as “ABU" - asymptomatic bacterial urinary tract infection. The general consensus that has emerged in both human and veterinary circles would be to NOT treat occult UTI and to watch the patient to see if clinical signs do emerge. If and when clinical signs emerge - treat as for a routine UTI. 9 of 101 dogs in a recent study of “normal” dogs out of the U of Wisconsin vet school were found to have occult UTI - 4 of them persisted for 3 months and 4 were transient (1 was lost to follow-up). None of those 9 dogs developed clinical signs at any time during the 3 months of observation.
Treatment of asymptomatic bacterial urinary tract infections often times results in failure to clear the original organism, and sometimes results in the surviving bugs to have even a higher resistance pattern to antibacterials than before the treatment. An even worse scenario is that the original bug is cleared, but a new organism is now present that is more virulent and now associated with clinical signs.
IN GENERAL - if the dog has a UTI but no clincial signs - it is advisable to watch the animal and see how it plays out. If no clinical signs develop, then withhold treatment. Treat the UTI if and when clinical signs emerge.
