Diagnostic and therapeutic challenges of isolated genital tuberculosis and drug resistant urogenital tuberculosis- case series
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Discuss this preprint
Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?Listed in
This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.Abstract
Genito-urinary tuberculosis (GUTB) has varied presentation such as recurrent urinary tract infection, sterile pyuria with/without hematuria, irritating voiding symptoms, infertility, hydronephrosis and renal failure. Genital tuberculosis usually associated with renal TB. Very few case reports of isolated tuberculous epididymo-orchitis have been published in literature. Epididymal TB may be the only clinically evident location of infection in rare cases of GUTB. Epididymal TB presents with non-specific local insidious and progressive symptoms which are difficult to differentiate with cysts, tumours and other infections. Suspicion of tubercular etiology becomes stronger with bilateral epididymal involvement along with testicular lesion and resistant to multiple courses of antibiotics. Tuberculous epididymo-orchitis has significant impact on fertility, as sperm count and motility may be reduced by blockage of the vas and/or secondary atrophy. Timely diagnosis and treatment will prevent late sequel of disease such as non-functioning kidney and thimble bladder and infertility. We are presenting three cases of GUTB, two cases (Case 1 & 3) were isolated case of tuberculous epididymo-orchitis in a 20 year old male and a 35 year old male and one case (case 2) of complicated drug resistant genitourinary tuberculosis in a 29 year old male. These rare cases were managed successfully with diagnostic and therapeutic challenges.
Article activity feed
-
I am reaching out in regard to your Access Microbiology submission ACMI-D-22-00135R2 titled “Diagnostic and therapeutic challenges of isolated genital tuberculosis and drug resistant urogenital tuberculosis- case series.” While the work presented in the submission is scientifically sound, the manuscript has now been through two rounds of revision, during which grammatical corrections and consent forms from each patient included in the manuscript were requested. Upon review of the most recent version submitted, the manuscript is still hampered by grammatical errors throughout that make it difficult to read and understand the content. Additionally, two patient consent forms have been received, but the third has still not been provided. Due to these persistent grammatical and patient consent form issues, manuscript ACMI-D-22-00135R2 is no …
I am reaching out in regard to your Access Microbiology submission ACMI-D-22-00135R2 titled “Diagnostic and therapeutic challenges of isolated genital tuberculosis and drug resistant urogenital tuberculosis- case series.” While the work presented in the submission is scientifically sound, the manuscript has now been through two rounds of revision, during which grammatical corrections and consent forms from each patient included in the manuscript were requested. Upon review of the most recent version submitted, the manuscript is still hampered by grammatical errors throughout that make it difficult to read and understand the content. Additionally, two patient consent forms have been received, but the third has still not been provided. Due to these persistent grammatical and patient consent form issues, manuscript ACMI-D-22-00135R2 is no longer under consideration for publication in Access Microbiology. I am sorry that we cannot proceed with publication of your submission at this time and hope that the reviewer and editor feedback received will be helpful in submitting this work for publication elsewhere. Thank you for submitting your manuscript to Access Microbiology and best wishes in your future research endeavors.
-
-
-
There is no clear reason for this study. The paper is poorly structured and written, which has prevented a proper assessment of the research done.
-
Comments to Author
Title: It is recommended that the diagnosis/intervention of primary focus is followed by the words "case report". Key Words: Also, include "case report" as a key word. Abstract: Do not include references! Abstratc may show what is relevant about this case and what it add to the scientific literature, and we can not find this information. Main symptoms and/or important clinical findings are lowly well suggested, but the main diagnoses, therapeutic interventions, and outcomes not at all. Finally, we can not find a "take-away" lesson from this case. Introduction: It is very poor and not indicates why this case is relevant (references are old and incompletes). Patient information in both cases are acceptably well presented and we can be aware of diagnostic and therapeutic interventions, and outcome.
Comments to Author
Title: It is recommended that the diagnosis/intervention of primary focus is followed by the words "case report". Key Words: Also, include "case report" as a key word. Abstract: Do not include references! Abstratc may show what is relevant about this case and what it add to the scientific literature, and we can not find this information. Main symptoms and/or important clinical findings are lowly well suggested, but the main diagnoses, therapeutic interventions, and outcomes not at all. Finally, we can not find a "take-away" lesson from this case. Introduction: It is very poor and not indicates why this case is relevant (references are old and incompletes). Patient information in both cases are acceptably well presented and we can be aware of diagnostic and therapeutic interventions, and outcome. Discussion is poor and not well structured. It does not presented a scientific discussion of the strengths and limitations associated with this case report, does not presented relevant medical literature with references, and conclusions do not include a final paragraph with the primary "take-away" lesson of this case report (without references). Also, it is recommended to include a patient perspective on the treatment they received. Informed consent is provided. Therefore, I have to recommend not accept the report unless authors can be able to improve the structure of the article and explain why the information is relevant to scientific community.
Please rate the quality of the presentation and structure of the manuscript
Poor
To what extent are the conclusions supported by the data?
Partially support
Do you have any concerns of possible image manipulation, plagiarism or any other unethical practices?
No
Is there a potential financial or other conflict of interest between yourself and the author(s)?
No
If this manuscript involves human and/or animal work, have the subjects been treated in an ethical manner and the authors complied with the appropriate guidelines?
Yes
-
Comments to Author
1. Description of the case(s) Despite the coauthorship including six authors, the case description, especially for case1, is rather slim. Authors do not provide any rationale for the initiation of anti-TB treatment. 2. Presentation of results Well presented table 2 for Case 2 3. How the style and organization of the paper communicates and represents key findings The title appears rather bold, as they are only reporting two cases of urogenital TB. Abstract should not include references. Acronyms need to be spelled before they are used for the first time in the manuscript. 4. Literature analysis or discussion What is so special about these two cases to announce "successful treatment" in the title? Are genito-urinary TB success rate not high? Nothing is mentioned in the Discussion or in the …
Comments to Author
1. Description of the case(s) Despite the coauthorship including six authors, the case description, especially for case1, is rather slim. Authors do not provide any rationale for the initiation of anti-TB treatment. 2. Presentation of results Well presented table 2 for Case 2 3. How the style and organization of the paper communicates and represents key findings The title appears rather bold, as they are only reporting two cases of urogenital TB. Abstract should not include references. Acronyms need to be spelled before they are used for the first time in the manuscript. 4. Literature analysis or discussion What is so special about these two cases to announce "successful treatment" in the title? Are genito-urinary TB success rate not high? Nothing is mentioned in the Discussion or in the Introduction 5. Any other relevant comments
Please rate the quality of the presentation and structure of the manuscript
Poor
To what extent are the conclusions supported by the data?
Partially support
Do you have any concerns of possible image manipulation, plagiarism or any other unethical practices?
No
Is there a potential financial or other conflict of interest between yourself and the author(s)?
No
If this manuscript involves human and/or animal work, have the subjects been treated in an ethical manner and the authors complied with the appropriate guidelines?
Yes
-