Coagulopathy Caused by Concurrent Ciprofloxacin and Warfarin Use: What Other Factors Induce Coagulopathy?

BACKGROUND: To assess factors affecting the prolongation of the international normalized ratio (INR) with concurrent warfarin and ciprofloxacin use. METHODS: A retrospective case-control study was performed at a single, 2,000-bed tertiary hospital between January 2007 and December 2009. Thirty-three patients who were on warfarin and ciprofloxacin concurrently were enrolled. Demographics and clinical data were collected from medical records. RESULTS: Nine patients were assigned to the case group (prolonged INR) and 19 patients to the control group (normal INR). Activities of daily living (ADL) and total number of classes of medications taken demonstrated significant differences between the groups (15.33 vs. 7.11, p<0.001; 7.11 vs. 5.47, p=0.041). No bleeding complications occurred during this study. CONCLUSION: As ADL reflects patient performance status and general condition of an individual, we conclude that a poor general condition is associated with coagulopathy in persons concurrently using warfarin and ciprofloxacin.

Urine Cotinine for Assessing Tobacco Smoke Exposure in Korean: Analysis of the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES) / 결핵및호흡기질환

BACKGROUND: The level of urine cotinine is an indicator of tobacco smoke exposure. The purpose of this study is to investigate urine cotinine for the purpose of assessing the smoking status of Korean smokers and non-smokers exposed to tobacco smoke. METHODS: The subjects were identified from the 2007-2009 and the 2010 data sets of the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES). They were assigned as non-smokers, current smokers and ex-smokers. Non-smokers were also divided into three subset groups according to the duration of smoke exposure. Each group was stratified by gender prior to analysis. RESULTS: The median value of urine cotinine in the male current smokers was 1,221.93 ng/mL which was the highest among all groups. The difference between levels of urine cotinine for male and the female groups was statistically significant (p<0.01). In the female group, passive smoke exposure groups reported higher urine cotinine levels than non-exposure groups (p=0.01). The cutoff point for the discrimination of current smokers from non-smokers was 95.6 ng/mL in males and 96.8 ng/mL in females. The sensitivity and specificity were 95.2% and 97.1%, respectively, in males, 96.1% and 96.5% in females. However, the determination of urine cotinine level was not useful in distinguishing between passive smoke exposure groups and non-exposure groups. CONCLUSION: Urine cotinine concentration is a useful biomarker for discriminating non-smokers from current smokers. However, careful interpretation is necessary for assessing passive smoke exposure by urine cotinine concentration.