Methenamine Hippurate
(Synonyms: 马尿酸乌洛托品,Hexamine hippurate) 目录号 : GC44174
A broad-spectrum urinary antiseptic agent
Cas No.:5714-73-8
Sample solution is provided at 25 µL, 10mM.
;)
,-1-7$$$37316672.jpg');)
;)
;)
$$$36806353.jpg');)
;33(7)%EF%BC%9A546-561$$$37156877.jpg');)
;)
;)
;)
%201124-1138.$$$35908550.jpg');)
%20766-780.$$$37100057.jpg');)
%20418-432.$$$36893736.jpg');)
%EF%BC%9A-240-255.$$$35108512.jpg');)
533-545$$$36543525.jpg');)
%201-13.$$$36600053.jpg');)
;)
Quality Control & SDS
- View current batch:
- Purity: >97.00%
- COA (Certificate Of Analysis)
- SDS (Safety Data Sheet)
- Datasheet
Methenamine hippurate is a broad-spectrum urinary antiseptic agent. Under acidic conditions, methenamine hippurate is hydrolyzed to formaldehyde and ammonia, which exerts an antibacterial effect. It is effective against a wide range of bacteria but lacks activity against Proteus and other bacteria that increase urine alkalinity. Formulations containing methenamine hippurate have been used to treat urinary tract infections.
| Cas No. | 5714-73-8 | SDF | |
| 别名 | 马尿酸乌洛托品,Hexamine hippurate | ||
| Canonical SMILES | O=C(NCC(O)=O)C1=CC=CC=C1.N2(CN(C3)C4)CN3CN4C2 | ||
| 分子式 | C6H12N4•C9H9NO3 | 分子量 | 319.4 |
| 溶解度 | DMSO: Soluble,Methanol: Soluble | 储存条件 | Store at -20°C |
| General tips | 请根据产品在不同溶剂中的溶解度选择合适的溶剂配制储备液；一旦配成溶液，请分装保存，避免反复冻融造成的产品失效。 储备液的保存方式和期限：-80°C 储存时，请在 6 个月内使用，-20°C 储存时，请在 1 个月内使用。 为了提高溶解度，请将管子加热至37℃，然后在超声波浴中震荡一段时间。 |
||
| Shipping Condition | 评估样品解决方案：配备蓝冰进行发货。所有其他可用尺寸：配备RT，或根据请求配备蓝冰。 | ||
| 制备储备液 | |||
 |
1 mg | 5 mg | 10 mg |
| 1 mM | 3.1309 mL | 15.6544 mL | 31.3087 mL |
| 5 mM | 0.6262 mL | 3.1309 mL | 6.2617 mL |
| 10 mM | 0.3131 mL | 1.5654 mL | 3.1309 mL |
| 第一步：请输入基本实验信息（考虑到实验过程中的损耗，建议多配一只动物的药量） | ||||||||||
| 给药剂量 | mg/kg |  |
动物平均体重 | g | |
每只动物给药体积 | ul | |
动物数量 | 只 |
| 第二步：请输入动物体内配方组成（配方适用于不溶于水的药物；不同批次药物配方比例不同，请联系GLPBIO为您提供正确的澄清溶液配方） | ||||||||||
| % DMSO % % Tween 80 % saline | ||||||||||
| 计算重置 | ||||||||||
计算结果:
工作液浓度： mg/ml；
DMSO母液配制方法： mg 药物溶于 μL DMSO溶液（母液浓度 mg/mL，
体内配方配制方法：取 μL DMSO母液，加入 μL PEG300，混匀澄清后加入μL Tween 80，混匀澄清后加入 μL saline，混匀澄清。
1. 首先保证母液是澄清的；
2.
一定要按照顺序依次将溶剂加入，进行下一步操作之前必须保证上一步操作得到的是澄清的溶液，可采用涡旋、超声或水浴加热等物理方法助溶。
3. 以上所有助溶剂都可在 GlpBio 网站选购。
Methenamine Hippurate for preventing urinary tract infections
Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012 Oct 17;10(10):CD003265.PMID:23076896DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD003265.pub3.
Background: Methenamine salts are often used as an alternative to antibiotics for the prevention of urinary tract infection (UTI). This review was first published in Issue 1, 2002 and updated in Issue 4, 2007. Objectives: To assess the benefits and harms of Methenamine Hippurate in preventing UTI. Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL in The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE (from 1950), EMBASE (from 1980), reference lists of articles and abstracts from conference proceedings without language restriction. Manufacturers' of methenamine salts were contacted for unpublished studies and contact was made with known investigators.Date of last search: June 2012 Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials (RCT) and quasi-RCTs of Methenamine Hippurate used for the prevention of UTIs in all population groups were eligible. A comparison with a control/no treatment group was a prerequisite for selection. Data collection and analysis: Two authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. Statistical analyses were performed using the random effects model and the results expressed as risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI). An exploration of heterogeneity and a detailed description of results, grouped by population, was undertaken. Main results: Thirteen studies (2032 participants) were included. Six studies (654 patients) reported symptomatic UTI and eight studies (796 patients) reported bacteriuria. Overall, study quality was mixed. The overall pooled estimates for the major outcome measures were not interpretable because of underlying heterogeneity. Subgroup analyses suggested that Methenamine Hippurate may have some benefit in patients without renal tract abnormalities (symptomatic UTI: RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.89; bacteriuria: RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.83), but not in patients with known renal tract abnormalities (symptomatic UTI: RR 1.54, 95% CI 0.38 to 6.20; bacteriuria: RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.54 to 3.07). For short-term treatment duration (1 week or less) there was a significant reduction in symptomatic UTI in those without renal tract abnormalities (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.38). The rate of adverse events was low. Authors' conclusions: Methenamine Hippurate may be effective for preventing UTI in patients without renal tract abnormalities, particularly when used for short-term prophylaxis. It does not appear to work in patients with neuropathic bladder or in patients who have renal tract abnormalities. The rate of adverse events was low, but poorly described.There is a need for further large well-conducted RCTs to clarify this question, particularly for longer term use for people without neuropathic bladder.
Methenamine Hippurate compared with antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent recurrent urinary tract infections in women: the ALTAR non-inferiority RCT
Health Technol Assess 2022 May;26(23):1-172.PMID:35535708DOI:10.3310/QOIZ6538.
Background: Daily, low-dose antibiotic prophylaxis is the current standard care for women with recurrent urinary tract infection. Emerging antimicrobial resistance is a global health concern, prompting research interest in non-antibiotic agents such as Methenamine Hippurate, but comparative data on their efficacy and safety are lacking. Objective: To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of Methenamine Hippurate (Hiprex®; Mylan NV, Canonsburg, PA, USA) compared with current standard care (antibiotic prophylaxis) for recurrent urinary tract infection prevention in adult women. Design: Multicentre, pragmatic, open-label, randomised, non-inferiority trial of 12 months' treatment with the allocated intervention, including an early, embedded qualitative study and a 6-month post-treatment observation phase. The predefined non-inferiority margin was one urinary tract infection per person-year. Setting: Eight UK NHS secondary care sites. Participants: A total of 240 adult women with recurrent urinary tract infection requiring preventative treatment participated in the trial. Interventions: A central randomisation system allocated participants 1 : 1 to the experimental (Methenamine Hippurate: 1 g twice daily) or control (once-daily low-dose antibiotics: 50/100 mg of nitrofurantoin, 100 mg of trimethoprim or 250 mg of cefalexin) arm. Crossover between treatment arms was permitted. Main outcome measures: The primary clinical outcome was incidence of symptomatic antibiotic-treated urinary tract infection during the 12-month treatment period. Cost-effectiveness was assessed by incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained, extrapolated over the patient's expected lifetime using a Markov cohort model. Secondary outcomes included post-treatment urinary tract infections, total antibiotic use, microbiologically proven urinary tract infections, antimicrobial resistance, bacteriuria, hospitalisations and treatment satisfaction. Results: Primary modified intention-to-treat analysis comprised 205 (85%) randomised participants [102/120 (85%) participants in the antibiotics arm and 103/120 (86%) participants in the Methenamine Hippurate arm] with at least 6 months' data available. During treatment, the incidence rate of symptomatic, antibiotic-treated urinary tract infections decreased substantially in both arms to 1.38 episodes per person-year (95% confidence interval 1.05 to 1.72 episodes per person-year) for Methenamine Hippurate and 0.89 episodes per person year (95% confidence interval 0.65 to 1.12 episodes per person-year) for antibiotics (absolute difference 0.49; 90% confidence interval 0.15 to 0.84). This absolute difference did not exceed the predefined, strict, non-inferiority limit of one urinary tract infection per person-year. On average, Methenamine Hippurate was less costly and more effective than antibiotics in terms of quality-adjusted life-years gained; however, this finding was not consistent over the longer term. The urinary tract infection incidence rate 6 months after treatment completion was 1.72 episodes per year in the Methenamine Hippurate arm and 1.19 in the antibiotics arm. During treatment, 52% of urine samples taken during symptomatic urinary tract infections were microbiologically confirmed and higher proportions of participants taking daily antibiotics (46/64; 72%) demonstrated antibiotic resistance in Escherichia coli cultured from perineal swabs than participants in the Methenamine Hippurate arm (39/70; 56%) (p-value = 0.05). Urine cultures revealed that during treatment higher proportions of participants and samples from the antibiotic arm grew E. coli resistant to trimethoprim/co-trimoxazole and cephalosporins, respectively. Conversely, post treatment, higher proportions of participants in the Methenamine Hippurate arm (9/45; 20%) demonstrated multidrug resistance in E. coli isolated from perineal swabs than participants in the antibiotic arm (2/39; 5%) (p = 0.06). All other secondary outcomes and adverse events were similar in both arms. Limitations: This trial could not define whether or not one particular antibiotic was more beneficial, and progressive data loss hampered economic evaluation. Conclusions: This large, randomised, pragmatic trial in a routine NHS setting has clearly shown that Methenamine Hippurate is not inferior to current standard care (daily low-dose antibiotics) in preventing recurrent urinary tract infections in women. The results suggest that antimicrobial resistance is proportionally higher in women taking prophylactic antibiotics. Recommendations for research: Future research should include evaluation of other non-antibiotic preventative treatments in well-defined homogeneous patient groups, preferably with the comparator of daily antibiotics. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN70219762 and EudraCT 2015-003487-36. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 23. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Methenamine Hippurate compared with trimethoprim for the prevention of recurrent urinary tract infections: a randomized clinical trial
Int Urogynecol J 2022 Mar;33(3):571-580.PMID:34115162DOI:10.1007/s00192-021-04849-0.
Introduction and hypothesis: The objective was to find an alternative treatment to a low-dose antibiotic for the prevention of recurrent urinary tract infections (UTI) and to evaluate the difference in rates of reinfection within 1 year when treated with Methenamine Hippurate for prophylaxis compared with trimethoprim. Methods: We present a non-blinded randomized trial comparing Methenamine Hippurate with trimethoprim for the prevention of recurrent UTI at 12 months after starting treatment. Women over 18 who had at least two culture-positive UTI in the prior 6 months or three in the prior year were included. Ninety-two patients met enrollment criteria and were randomized to receive daily prophylaxis with Methenamine Hippurate or trimethoprim for a minimum of 6 months. Both intent-to-treat and per-protocol analyses if patients received the alternative drug after randomization were analyzed using Student's t test, Mann-Whitney U test, Kaplan-Meier curves, log-rank test, and a logistic and multivariate regression model. The primary outcome of this study was culture-proven UTI recurrence by 12 months after initiating prophylaxis. Results: In the intent-to-treat analysis, we found no difference between groups in recurrent UTI, with a 65% (28 out of 43) recurrence in the trimethoprim group versus 65% (28 out of 43) in the Methenamine Hippurate group (p = 1.00). In the per-protocol analysis, 65% (26 out of 40) versus 65% (30 out of 46) of patients had UTI recurrences in the trimethoprim group versus the Methenamine Hippurate group (p = 0.98). Conclusions: Methenamine Hippurate may be an alternative for the prevention of recurrent UTI, with similar rates of recurrence and adverse effects to trimethoprim.
Use of Methenamine Hippurate to prevent urinary tract infections in community adult women: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Br J Gen Pract 2021 Jun 24;71(708):e528-e537.PMID:34001538DOI:10.3399/BJGP.2020.0833.
Background: Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are often treated with antibiotics and are a source of antibiotic overuse. Aim: To systematically review randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adult women in the community with a history of recurrent UTIs and who use Methenamine Hippurate prophylactically. Design and setting: Systematic review of women in the UK, Australia, Norway, and US (aged ≥18 years) with recurrent UTIs receiving Methenamine Hippurate against placebo or no treatment, and antibiotics. Method: The authors searched three databases, clinical trial registries, and performed forward-backward citation analysis on references of included studies. Results: Six studies involving 557 participants were included (447 were analysed). Of the six studies, five were published and one was an unpublished trial record with results, three compared Methenamine Hippurate against placebo or control, and three compared Methenamine Hippurate with antibiotics. For the number of patients who remained asymptomatic, Methenamine Hippurate showed a non-statistically significant trend of benefit versus antibiotics over 12 months (risk ratio [RR] 0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.40 to 1.07, I2 49%), versus control over 6 or 12 months (RR 0.56, 95% CI = 0.13 to 2.35, I2 93%), and a non-statistically significant trend versus any antibiotic for abacteruria (RR 0.80, 95% CI = 0.62 to 1.03, I2 23%). A similar non-statistically significant trend of benefits for Methenamine Hippurate for the number of UTI or bacteriuric episodes was found, and a non-statistically significant difference in the number of patients experiencing adverse events between Methenamine Hippurate and any comparator, with a trend towards benefit for the Methenamine Hippurate, was identified. Antibiotic use and resistance were not consistently reported. Conclusion: There is insufficient evidence to be certain of the benefits of Methenamine Hippurate to prevent UTI. Further research is needed to test the drug's effectiveness in preventing UTIs and as an alternative for antibiotic treatment for UTI.
Nonantibiotic prevention and management of recurrent urinary tract infection
Nat Rev Urol 2018 Dec;15(12):750-776.PMID:30361493DOI:10.1038/s41585-018-0106-x.
Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are highly prevalent, lead to considerable patient morbidity, incur large financial costs to health-care systems and are one of the most common reasons for antibiotic use worldwide. The growing problem of antimicrobial resistance means that the search for nonantibiotic alternatives for the treatment and prevention of UTI is of critical importance. Potential nonantibiotic measures and treatments for UTIs include behavioural changes, dietary supplementation (such as Chinese herbal medicines and cranberry products), NSAIDs, probiotics, D-mannose, Methenamine Hippurate, estrogens, intravesical glycosaminoglycans, immunostimulants, vaccines and inoculation with less-pathogenic bacteria. Some of the results of trials of these approaches are promising; however, high-level evidence is required before firm recommendations for their use can be made. A combination of these agents might provide the optimal treatment to reduce recurrent UTI, and trials in specific population groups are required.