10 5 cfu ml. Normal value of ureaplasma urealiticum (acceptable norm) in the body

anonymous, Female, 25 years old

Hello! During pregnancy at 15 weeks. In the tank, urine culture found enteroccocus spp 1x10 in degree 5 CFU/ml. Ampicillin was prescribed (according to the antibiogram there was high sensitivity), I took a dosage of 250 mg 3 times a day + prevention of thrush St. Pimafucin. At 20 weeks. I re-did the tank. Urine culture showed e.Coli 5 x 10 in grade 3 cfu/ml, no treatment was prescribed, justifying that the titer was within the normal range. At 23 weeks. I handed over the tank. Culture from the cervical canal, t.K. Throughout pregnancy, vaginal smears showed an increased number of leukocytes (25-35 c/c), diagnosed as St. Terzhinan for a period of 14-15 weeks. The result of tank culture from c/c at 23 weeks is enterococcus spp 1 x 10 to 5 degrees CFU/ml. General tests urine and urine tests according to Nechiporenko throughout pregnancy are excellent, no complaints. Tell me, does it make sense to re-treat enterococcus if there are no complaints, is it possible to use antibiotics so often during pregnancy? What is the upper permissible limit of ent.Spp in urine and c/c during pregnancy? Deadline is now Time 23-24 weeks. Thank you!

Hello! Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are among the most common types of pathology in pregnant women. modern ideas, secrete lower and upper urinary tract infections. Infections of the lower urinary tract include urethritis and cystitis, and upper urinary tract infections. Both the first and second infections are divided into uncomplicated and complicated. The source of UTI is the normal microflora that colonizes the periurethral area (the area around the urethra) and most often belongs to the Enterobacteriaceae family, as well as to species of coagulase-negative staphylococci. The most common causative agent of uncomplicated UTIs in modern conditions remains E.coli (about 80%), then St. Saprophyticus (up to 10%), Klebsiella spp., Pr. Mirabilis, Enterobacter spp., as well as gram-positive flora - streptococci of groups B and D, St.epidermidis. In 95% of cases, uncomplicated UTIs with an established etiopathogen are caused by a single microorganism. However, in 0.5-30% of cases, bacteriological examination does not reveal pathogenic flora in the urine of patients., an increase in the volume of residual urine, sometimes the appearance of vesicoureteral and/or ureteropelvic reflux; - increased urine pH, the appearance of glucosuria (the appearance of sugar in the urine); microbes in urine - 100 thousand or more in 1 ml, and in two consecutive cultures taken after 3-7 days, but not less than after 1 day. It should be emphasized that it is necessary to obtain the same result, that is, an identical pathogen must be isolated in both crops. Such strict requirements are justified by the fact that in approximately 20% of cases (in pregnant women up to 40%), false positive results occur that are not confirmed by repeated culture. Thus, double determination of bacteriuria is intended to protect a significant contingent of pregnant women from unjustified antibacterial treatment, and, at the same time, to select those patients for whom such treatment is absolutely indicated. 2 weeks after treatment, urine culture must be performed. In case of a negative result (urine sterility or bacteriuria ≤ 10^4 CFU/ml), the pregnant woman is further monitored as usual. If she has risk factors for UTI, long-term prophylactic administration of herbal medicine (2 tablets or 50 drops 3 times a day) is advisable. If asymptomatic bacteriuria is repeatedly determined, then antibacterial treatment is prescribed, a different regimen is chosen, or the established sensitivity of the identified microorganisms is guided by.

- mechanical compression of the ureters by an enlarged uterus and dilated ovarian veins (in the second half of pregnancy, mainly on the right); - weakening of the urethral sphincter (at the end of pregnancy); has become commonplace. Medical statistics show: over the past few years, the lines “ureaplasma normal” or “conditional normocenosis” have become less and less common in patient test results forms, and the number of detected diseases caused by opportunistic microorganisms is growing year by year.

The frequency of diagnosis of “ureaplasma infection” reaches 20% in relatively healthy women. Ureaplasma in a smear taken from women at risk is detected even more often - in 30% of cases of the total number of subjects examined.

The data from pediatricians is also impressive: every fifth child becomes infected while passing through the birth canal.

In men, ureaplasma urealiticum is detected in increased quantities much less frequently than in the fairer sex. Early detection of the causative agents of the disease and proper treatment guarantee complete relief from the disease.

Read about how to recognize the disease, what indicators of ureaplasma in women are considered normal, and what the lack of adequate therapy can lead to.

Julia asks:

Dear doctor!
I would like to ask you the following question:
I did PCR tests for STIs and received the following results:

1. Ureaplasma urealiticum quantity. 7.6x10*3 !!! copies/10*5 epithelial cells
2. Mycoplasma hominis quant. 1.7x10*3 !!! copies/10*5 epithelial cells
3. Gardnerella vaginalis count. 6.2x10*4 !!! copies/10*5 epithelial cells
4. Candida albicans count. 536 copies/10*5 epithelial cells

I would like to consult in more detail about these values.
And perhaps about the treatment and severity of these infections.
Thank you in advance!

The results of the examination indicate the presence of a sexually transmitted infection, gardnerella predominates, ureaplasma and mycoplasma are in low titer, this may indicate an inactive process on this moment, to clarify the diagnosis, it is recommended to donate blood to determine antibodies class A,M,G. To prescribe adequate treatment, it is recommended to consult with a gynecologist who will select the optimal treatment for you, taking into account your age, as well as concomitant pathologies. Both sexual partners should receive treatment, and sexual contact should be excluded during treatment to avoid reinfection. Read more about these diseases in a series of articles by following the link: gardnerellosis, mycoplasmosis, ureaplasmosis, candidiasis.

Anastasia asks:

Good afternoon
My young man was diagnosed with ureaplasma urealiticum, result 3.9x10*7!!! copies/10*5 epithelial cells.
And I have 7.4x10*3!!!copies/10*5 epithelial cells.
Help me decipher the analysis, what do these indications mean and is treatment required?

Please specify what method the examination was carried out and the reference values ​​of the analysis, because Each laboratory may have its own standards and overdiagnosis may occur. Read more about this disease in a series of articles by clicking on the link: Ureaplasmosis.

Anastasia comments:

PCR diagnostic method, quantitative analysis Ureaplasma urealiticum
Unit value measurements Normal values
7.4x10*3 !!! copies/10*5 epithelial cells 0

The results of the examination indicate the persistence of infection in the body. It is recommended to consult with a gynecologist-infectious disease specialist to decide on the need for treatment. This pathogen is a saprophyte and if there are no signs of an inflammatory reaction, treatment may not be necessary. However, if you are planning a pregnancy, treatment is recommended without fail, because During pregnancy, the disease can worsen and affect the fetus. Read more about this disease in a series of articles by clicking on the link: Ureaplasmosis

Julia asks:

please tell me, the test came back, ureplasma 10 at the top is 7. How serious is this? Thank you.

This conclusion indicates that you have been diagnosed with ureaplasmosis, so you need to personally contact your attending gynecologist, who, after an examination, will prescribe you adequate treatment. You can get more detailed information on the question you are interested in in the corresponding section of our website by clicking on the following link: Ureaplasma and ureaplasmosis

Alice asks:

General form
Study Result Reference values
Laboratory of PCR diagnostics
Chlamydia trachomatis DNA, scraping (PCR real time) (-) negative (-) negative
DNA Gardn. vaginalis quantitatively 1.3x10**2 kopecks/ml
DNA of Lactobacillus spp. quantitatively 9.4x10**7 kopecks/ml
HPV DNA screening for high oncogenic risk (type 16,18,31,33,35,39,45,52,58,59,67), scraping (-) neg. (-) neg.
DNA Herpes simplex I, II, scraping (-) negative (-) negative
Mycoplasma genitalium DNA, scraping (PCR real time) (-) negative (-) negative
Mycoplasma hominis DNA, scraping (PCR real time) (-) negative (-) negative

This conclusion does not reveal any deviations, so there is no cause for concern. You can get more detailed information on the issue you are interested in in the corresponding section of our website by clicking on the following link: Smear. Additional information You can also get it in the following section of our website: Gynecologist

Diana asks:

HPV DNA total. Not found
Additionally: NLM DNA 16,31,33,35,52,58 types: not detected
HPV DNA types 18,39,45,49: not detected
HPV DNA 51.56 types: not detected
Total number of epithelial cells: 1.4*10 to 4 cells

This conclusion means that the human papillomavirus has not been detected in you, so there is no reason to worry. You can get more detailed information on the issue you are interested in in the corresponding section of our website by clicking on the following link: Papilloma. You can also obtain additional information in the following section of our website: Sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) and in the series of articles: Laboratory diagnostics, Sexually transmitted diseases (STDs)

Diana asks:

The total number of epithelial cells is 1.4 * 10 to the 4th degree of cells

Please clarify your question.

Natalya asks:

Hello. Please comment on the result of the analysis of ureaplasma urealyticum 1.39 x10*4 GE/10*5 class.h

This conclusion indicates that you previously suffered from ureaplasmosis. Given the results obtained, treatment in the absence of clinical symptoms is currently not required. You can get more detailed information on the question you are interested in in the corresponding section of our website by clicking on the following link: asks:

Hello. I am 26 years old. I have pulmonary embolism of small branches of the pulmonary artery, I was in the hospital for a long time for treatment, the iliac vein was ligated (acute thrombosis of the internal iliac vein with flotation into the common iliac vein), and there HCV was discovered by ELISA. I have been using Pradaxa for life.
Passed a quantitative HCV PCR test. Please decipher the analysis values, because... I can not understand.
HCV RNA - 1.9*10*4 cop/ml;
HCV RNA - 4.5*10*3 IU/ml;
genotype 1c.
Thanks a lot!

This conclusion means that you have previously suffered from viral hepatitis C. To objectively assess liver function, you need to take biochemical liver tests and do an ultrasound of the liver, and then personally consult with your attending infectious disease specialist, who will conduct an examination and prescribe adequate treatment, as well as determine further tactics observations.

Ureaplasma is classified as a sexually transmitted infection. However, many doctors consider this attitude to be conditional, since urealiticum, although it lives in the genital tract, does not always cause ureaplasmosis, but occurs in many healthy people. The fact is that these microorganisms are conditionally pathogenic, because their role in inflammatory processes is quite ambiguous and has not been fully studied. In older medical literature, ureaplasma is classified as a mycoplasma, but due to their ability to independently break down urea, they are classified as a separate bacterial class.

Today, the two types of Ureaplasm urealiticum and pavrum are of greatest interest. In general, science knows more than 14 serotypes of these microorganisms that do not have a cell membrane or DNA.

In addition to the sexual route of infection, intrauterine infection is also common, in which microorganisms, having entered the fetus, penetrate into its genital tract, where they can remain throughout its entire life, without manifesting itself in any way until a favorable moment for the development of ureaplasmosis.

Due to such characteristics of these microorganisms, most doctors in the CIS countries attach high importance to the search for new ways to quantify bacteria both in people with symptoms of ureaplasmosis and in asymptomatic patients.

In the literature, lines such as “ureaplasma norm is 10*3” are often found, but what do these numbers actually mean, what and what is the acceptable norm for ureaplasma, and when should antibiotic treatment be prescribed?

Ureaplasma: normal value

Urealiticum, like pavrum, are found in secretions from the urogenital tract and on the mucous membranes of 60% of people of reproductive age who are practically healthy. At the same time, it is generally accepted that if CFU/ml is less than 10*4, then ureaplasma is an indicator of normality, but if the quantitative value of microorganisms exceeds this value, then it is recommended to prescribe treatment.

Many doctors believe that a value below 104 microbial bodies in 1 g or 1 ml should be regarded as ureaplasma urealyticum normal, since these microorganisms in such indicators are characteristic even of healthy people. That is, in order to determine whether the content of ureaplasma corresponds to the norm, first of all you need to obtain the test material in the minimum required quantity. When it comes to collecting such test material as blood, sperm, urine, cerebrospinal fluid, there are no special problems, but at the same time, collecting from the cervical canal, vagina or urethra is quite difficult, and in the absence of pathological discharge, almost impossible. And if in women it is possible to get a small amount of discharge per day, then in men this is unrealistic, therefore, based on the analysis of the discharge of asymptomatic patients, it is possible to understand what this person ureaplasmosis, normal or complete absence of urealyticum, is also impossible. Therefore, in order to determine whether the patient has a normal or elevated ureaplasma urealyticum value, alternative methods are used, namely:

However, it is worth considering that at different periods of the menstrual cycle there will be different quantities detachments of the vaginal epithelium. And this is subject to the same depth of fence for the same woman. Because of this feature, it is quite difficult to answer the question of what norm of microorganisms can be detected with ureaplasma and does not require treatment. In addition, these same features are identified as the reason for the high frequency of detection of pavrum and urealiticum in pregnant women, while the analysis before conception could give a negative result.

Ureaplasma: quantitative determination, norm

In addition, if you think about it, why exactly 10*4 ureaplasma urealiticum is the norm, and not 10*1 or 10*9? The origins of this significance should be sought in the studies of Edward Cass in 1956, who, when examining patients with polyneuritis, used the concept of a significant level, which was supposed to divide asymptomatic patients into two groups:

• Those who need treatment;
• Those who do not need therapy.

Cass believed that the line should be at 10*5, and many of his contemporaries agreed with this value. Only decades later, during many years of research, it was discovered that many women are susceptible to the disease; according to Cass, the amount of ureaplasma is normal or below normal by 30%. Similar studies in men were carried out by the Germans in 1982, during which it was found that men in whom the concentration of microorganisms in the sample exceeded 10*4 CFU/ml were susceptible to various types of genitourinary system infections.

There are not so many studies that clearly define the normal amount of ureaplasma. The most significant among them are Lipman's 1988 studies on the connection between the frequency of premature births in women and an indicator that exceeds the norm of ureaplasma in the body by 2 times. There are Horowitz studies conducted in the early postpartum period to determine negative influence microorganisms urealiticum, contributing to the development of endometritis at a value of 10*5.