4.4 Article

Effect of antibiotics on enterocystoplasty urinary nitrosamine levels

Journal

UROLOGY
Volume 58, Issue 5, Pages 660-664

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0090-4295(01)01363-2

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives. To evaluate the microbiologic characteristics of enterocystoplasty urine and assess the influence of bacteria type and effect of prophylactic and therapeutic antibiotic administration on the urinary nitrosamine levels of patients with enterocystoplasty. Nitrosamines have been implicated in the development of cancer in patients with an enterocystoplasty. Urinary tract infection (UTI) is associated with elevated nitrosamine levels. Methods. Urine samples were collected to determine the urinary nitrosamine levels and for microscopy, culture, and sensitivity from 42 patients with an enterocystoplasty and 6 normal controls. A subgroup of 5 enterocystoplasty patients with proven UTI was also evaluated by measuring the urinary nitrosamine levels before and after a therapeutic course of antibiotics. Results. Of the 42 cystoplasty patients, 22 had a proven UTI; none of the controls had one. Sixteen of the cystoplasty patients were taking prophylactic antibiotics and had mean N-nitrosamine levels equivalent to the control levels. The mean nitrosamine levels were highest in patients with a UTI (1.9 mu mol/L). Escherichia coli was the most common infecting organism (11 patients) and resulted in the highest mean nitrosamine levels (2.1 mu mol/L). The nitrosamine levels fell with UTI treatment to within the control range. Conclusions. UTI occurs in 51% of enterocystoplasty patients and is associated with elevated mean urinary nitrosamine levels. E. coli is the infecting organism in 50% of cases. Antibiotic prophylaxis reduces the nitrosamine levels to those of the controls. UTI treatment results in a rapid reduction of elevated nitrosamine levels to control levels. (C) 2001, Elsevier Science Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available