Abstract

Urinary catheter varies in terms of material, shape and size and each type is made for a particular purpose. During some diseases, the urinary catheters should remain in the bladder for a long time and this leads to serious complications such as pathological complications of bladder and urinary tract infections. In this study, pathological complications and lower urinary tract infection following the use of two different types of urinary catheters in male rabbits was evaluated. This study was designed in the form of a randomized clinical trial. 20 five-month-old New Zealand rabbits weighing 2 to 2.5 kilograms were randomly assigned to 2 groups of 10. The first group was under cystostomy with Nelatone catheter, and second group was under cystostomy with Foley catheter for 7 days. After this period, part of the rabbit bladder tissue was isolated and sent to the laboratory for the pathology report. A urine sample was aseptically taken and sent to the laboratory and any number of bacterial growth in urine culture was considered a urinary tract infection. Prevalence of urinary tract infection in the two groups was identified and by Gram staining and specific biochemical tests types of bacteria were determined. Obtained data were entered into SPSS software version 17 and statistical tests such as Chi-square, Fisher's exact test and Mann-Whitney tests were used for data analysis. The highest frequency of grade 3 inflammatory was observed in rabbits with foley catheter, also, rabbits with Nelatone catheter showed the highest frequency in this intensity. There was no significant difference in severity of inflammation. Percent Of inflammatory cells in pathological samples ranged from 5 to 80. In both groups, the most frequency were observed in the samples with five to ten percent polymorphonuclear cell, and no significant difference was observed between the two groups. Difference of frequency of bleeding between the two groups was not significant. No significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of infection. There was no significant difference between the two types of catheters in terms of the severity of inflammation, inflammatory cells, bleeding in the tissues of the bladder and urinary tract infections. This indicates that none of this two types of catheters has particular preference over another.