Have Medical Questions? Ask a Doctor Online!
Hello from JustAnswer.
It is possible, but it is a very low risk. As a baseline risk, it is a small percentage of bladder infections that will progress to a kidney infection, and once an antibiotic is started, the risk is dramatically lower. It cannot be said that the risk is zero until the infection is eradicated, as there is always a chance that the specific germ is resistant or may become resistant to the antibiotic being used, but the risk is quite low.
I would note that the evidence on D-mannose is that it is much better at preventing urinary infections in people that tend to get recurrent infection but not as good at eradicating infections once they are established. However, it has not been specifically studied on whether it is effective at preventing the progression of a bladder infection into a kidney infection.
If I can provide any clarification, please let me know.
I can initiate an Additional Service offer for a phone call, but not for texting. If that would be of interest to you, please let me know.
To clarify, if you were diagnosed with a UTI, then you already have a bladder infection. You asked about the risk of it becoming a kidney infection, and it is a minimal risk that it will develop into a kidney infection.
It is usually not necessary to consider D-mannose for prevention unless there is additional history that you have not yet relayed. With the history that you describe, this is not as much a problem with a second infection as it is more likely that the original infection was never completely treated, since you had to quit the Bactrim and Cipro early because of adverse reactions.
If you complete the antibiotic course and eradicate this infection and remain symptom-free for several weeks, and then develop recurrent UTIs or if you have a history of several UTIs over the course of a year, then that would be the point at which it is usually considered to use D-mannose for prevention of recurrent UTIs. If you already have a history of previous UTIs over recent years, then you may have met this threshold.
Yes, this clarification is correct.
UTIs are fairly common in women, and two infections two years apart are not an excessive rate of infection.
When the symptoms are not as severe, it is typically due to a low amount of inflammation caused by the infection, and a relatively low count of bacteria is one of the reasons for a lesser amount of inflammation. But it is not the only reason. Some woman seem to be more or less sensitive to bacteria growing in the urine, so may have more or less inflammation, regardless of the count of the bacteria. There are also certain bacteria that tend to be more aggressive than others, so the specific germ also could be the reason for more or less inflammation.
I understand that this is causing you anxiety, but UTIs in women are very common. It causes between 6 and 7 million office visits each year in the US.
Stress increases the risk for any infection. There are studies that show that children living in homes with parental discord are more likely to develop Strep throat. A previous viral infection could have a generic stress effect. A cold, though, would not have a direct effect on causing a UTI.
As for other illnesses that have a more direct effect on contributing to urinary tract infections, there are certain anatomic abnormalities in the urinary tract that predispose to infection, but these are relatively rare, so are a cause of only a small percentage of UTIs. Any condition that interferes with flow of urine also can contribute to the development of infection, such as kidney stones. But the vast majority of UTIs are not related to any of these diseases.
There also are certain lifestyle factors that increase the risk for UTIs, including drinking low levels of fluids, so that the bladder is not emptied as often, and sexual activity. The germs involved in UTIs are not sexually transmitted germs, but it is thought that the mechanical manipulation of the urethra during intercourse allows for germs to enter the bladder. This is actually a bigger risk for women that are suddenly more sexually active. This can occur during honeymoons, and is referred to as honeymoon cystitis. I also see this in some patients that are married to men that are seen infrequently, such as in the military or travel long distances as part of their job, so that there are periods of abstinence followed by frequent sexual activity, and UTIs develop during the time of increased sexual activity.
Yes. All of your personal information is not accessible except by the office/billing staff. Even the experts cannot access the personal information. The only information visible to me is that you are a 21 year old female.
It certainly is possible that intercourse contributed to this infection. It would be reasonable to be drinking plenty of water, particularly on days on which you anticipate that you may be sexually active, and to empty your bladder shortly after intercourse. It is not necessary to interrupt any post-coital cuddling, etc., but once the intimacy is completed, then emptying your bladder should be one of your first acts.
No, not really. Poor personal hygiene can contribute to UTIs and women that wear dirty underwear may have poor personal hygiene, but relatively few UTIs are directly related to poor personal hygiene.
I never said that the only way to completely cure a UTI is through antibiotics. It is true that for certain infections, a full course of antibiotics is necessary to completely eradicate a UTI, which is likely why the first symptoms this time did not resolve when you did not complete a course of antibiotics. But before antibiotics were invented, it is not that once a woman got a UTI, then she remained infected for the rest of her life. The immune system can get rid of many infections, although it may take longer to do so.
Not directly. Poor sleep can create a generic stress effect, although it usually requires more than one night of poor sleep.
I am sorry about the delay, but I was away from the computer.
Usually in the back or the flank/side of the abdomen.
It may be possible, but it would be extremely unlikely.
Strictly speaking, having a germ in the urine without symptoms would be called asymptomatic bactiuria, not an asymptomatic UTI. Bactiuria is a term that only means that there is bacteria in the urine. The vast majority of people with asymptomatic bactiuria do not progress to a UTI, and usually resolve spontaneously, so we typically do not treat asymptomatic bactiuria. Since we do not treat it, we also usually do not even look for it.
So, while it is possible that the germ continued to grow in the urine for years to later cause an infection, this is not typical for how germs exist in the urinary tract.
It is not common in that sense, but as I noted above, there is always a chance that the specific germ may become resistant to the antibiotic being used, so the patient may notice a worsening of symptoms while taking antibiotics, but it is not really getting a new UTI.
Please provide a positive rating so that I am credited for assisting you.