[Question #8469] Chlamydia possible?
44 months ago
|
Hey Doc,
I had vaginal sex with an Asian CSW in July. All was protected and I do not remember the condom
Being compromised or broken. I’m married and didn’t worry about it until a couple of weeks ago. I had a kidney stone and went to the hospital. I of course had a urinalysis that showed 3 wbc per hpf with a negative LE test. I freaked out that I had chlamydia or gonorrhea. Is this test result In a way indicative of an infection. Much of what I read said that a kidney stone alone could cause this result (I have never had in my urine before). The reason for the anxiety is the difference of ranges different labs have. Some say more then 3 is high others say 5. I have been embarrassed to talk to my doc about it so here I am.
Thanks
![]() |
Edward W. Hook M.D.
44 months ago
|
Welcome to the forum. Thanks for your question. I’ll be glad to comment.
Little in your description suggests that you are at risk for chlamydia. You used a condom, are currently asymptomatic and while about half of chlamydial infections can be asymptomatic, after nearly 6 months the absence of any symptoms makes an active infection quite unlikely. I understand your frustration with the variability in the WBC ranges given for abnormal values in urinalyses. Irrespective however a number of WBC is present in your urinalysis is low and, as you mention such findings are completely typical of the presence of kidney stones.
My advice is not to worry. However, given the concerns that you expressed, I also think there may be value and getting a urine test for chlamydia. Urine chlamydia tests are amongst the most accurate tests in our medicine and a negative test would provide reassurance that you do not have chlamydial infection.
I hope this perspective is helpful to you. If any part of my responses unclear or there are additional questions, please don’t hesitate do you say you were up to two follow-ups for clarification. EWH
---
44 months ago
|
Thanks for the response,
So to sum up what you said…medically the test not needed but it may help me let this go if so test. Is that correct? Just to ad a little more detail. I was given two urinalysis tests. One in the ER (that was the one with that WBC) and the other Taken at the doctors office the next day. That one came back “0-6 WBC” not a specific number as in the hospital but range. The leukocyte eraste test was negative in both.
Let me know if my above understanding or your response is correct and if the additional information changes your thoughts on the matter at all
![]() |
Edward W. Hook M.D.
44 months ago
|
Your interpretation of my assessment is correct. The additional information does not change my assessment. The presence of white blood cells on urinalysis is measured in different ways depending on the methodology. Either way you had relatively few WBCs in your urine which could well be normal or explained by kidney stones. It’s clear that you are concerned about this exposure and a negative test which is easy to obtain and will provide conclusive results of this time may be reassuring.EWH ---