You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 244 No. 6, August 8, 1980 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  EDITORIALS
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Single-Dose Treatment of Cystitis

Walter E. Stamm, MD

JAMA. 1980;244(6):591-592.

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Based on the rationale that (1) cystitis is a superficial mucosal infection pathologically, (2) successful treatment of bladder infections depends on antibiotic levels achieved in urine, and (3) many antibiotics achieve very high urinary concentrations, the concept of treating acute cystitis with a single-dose antibiotic regimen has been attractive to physicians for years. The observation that a single irrigation of the bladder with neomycin sulfate cures many patients with bladder bacteriuria further suggested that brief drug therapy might well be effective. Unfortunately, early attempts to use single-dose sulfonamides, streptomycin sulfate, and cephaloridine were not uniformly successful. Inclusion of patients with chronic infections, unrecognized upper-tract involvement (localization studies were not usually done), and drug-resistant organisms may have contributed to single-dose treatment failures. However, in 1967 Grüneberg and Brumfitt1 cured 88% of infections judged clinically to be cystitis with a single, 2-g dose of sulfadoxine (sulphormethoxine). Subsequently, Ronald et al,2 . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]


Author Affiliations

University of Washington Seattle


Footnotes

Address editorial communications to the Editor, 535 N Dearborn St, Chicago, IL 60610.



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1980 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.