Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. 2011; 13(1):19-39
Objectives. To determine the diagnostic and treatment patterns for acute male urethritis (AMU) in Russia.
Retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted during 2009 in 4 cities of Russia: Kaluga, Pskov, Smolensk and Tula. Data on diagnostic and treatment approaches for AMU subjects ≥16 years old were collected and analyzed using specially designed case report forms.
556 cases of AMU were analyzed during study period. The average age of patients was 29 years (16–68 years). The following diagnostic methods were used in 96.4% of cases (C. trachomatis: PCR (138⁄24.8%), ELISA (156⁄28.1%); N. gonorrhoeae and T. vaginalis, respectively: urethral smear microscopy (445⁄80.0% and 320⁄57.6%), PCR (109⁄19.6% and 130⁄23.4%); U. urealyticum and M. hominis, respectively: bacteriology (140⁄25.2% and 135⁄24.3%), PCR (135⁄24.3% and 133⁄23.9%); M. genitalium: PCR (135⁄24.3%). The most common diagnosis in center #1 was gonococcal urethritis (GU) (61.7%), in centers ##2, 3, 5 – non-gonococcal urethritis (NGU) (68.0, 54.7, 66.3%), in center #4 – unspecified urethritis (45.1%) and NGU (36.3%). Treatment patterns included antimicrobials (ABx) solely in 66.3, and ABx + non-ABx – in 32.2% of cases.
According to the results, use of standard methods for AMU diagnosis was rather rare and ABx treatment in some cases was not in compliance with modern practical guidelines for STD and AMU.