Sodium pyrophosphate enhances iron bioavailability from bouillon cubes fortified with ferric pyrophosphate

Fe fortification of centrally manufactured and frequently consumed condiments such as bouillon cubes could help prevent Fe deficiency in developing countries. However, Fe compounds that do not cause sensory changes in the fortified product, such as ferric pyrophosphate (FePP), exhibit low absorption in humans. Tetra sodium pyrophosphate (NaPP) can form soluble complexes with Fe, which could increase Fe bioavailability. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate Fe bioavailability from bouillon cubes fortified with either FePP only, FePP+NaPP, ferrous sulphate (FeSO4) only, or FeSO4+NaPP. We first conducted in vitro studies using a protocol of simulated digestion to assess the dialysable and ionic Fe, and the cellular ferritin response in a Caco-2 cell model. Second, Fe absorption from bouillon prepared from intrinsically labelled cubes (2·5 mg stable Fe isotopes/cube) was assessed in twenty-four Fe-deficient women, by measuring Fe incorporation into erythrocytes 2 weeks after consumption. Fe bioavailability in humans increased by 46 % (P<0·005) when comparing bouillons fortified with FePP only (4·4 %) and bouillons fortified with FePP+NaPP (6·4 %). Fe absorption from bouillons fortified with FeSO4 only and with FeSO4+NaPP was 33·8 and 27·8 %, respectively (NS). The outcome from the human study is in agreement with the dialysable Fe from the in vitro experiments. Our findings suggest that the addition of NaPP could be a promising strategy to increase Fe absorption from FePP-fortified bouillon cubes, and if confirmed by further research, for other fortified foods with complex food matrices as well.ISSN:0007-1145ISSN:1475-266

Thulium laser enucleation of prostate versus laparoscopic trans-vesical simple prostatectomy in the treatment of large benign prostatic hyperplasia: head-to-head comparison

Objectives: To compare thulium laser enucleation of prostate (ThuLEP) versus laparoscopic trans-vesical simple prostatectomy (LSP) in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).Materials and Methods: Data of patients who underwent surgery for "large" BPH (&gt;80mL) at three Institutions were collected and analyzed. Two institutions performed ThuLEP only; the third institution performed LSP only. Preoperative (indwelling catheter status, prostate volume (PVol), hemoglobin (Hb), Q(max), post-voiding residual volume (PVR), IPSS, QoL, IIEF-5) and perioperative data (operative time, enucleated adenoma, catheterization time, length of stay, Hb-drop, complications) were compared. Functional (Q(max), PVR, Þlta Q(max)) and patient-reported outcomes (IPSS, QoL, IIEF-5, Þlta IPSS, Þlta QoL) were compared at last follow-up.Results: 80 and 115 patients underwent LSP and ThuLEP, respectively. At baseline, median PVol was 130 versus 120mL, p &lt;0.001; Q(max) 9.6 vs. 7.1mL/s, p=0.005; IPSS 21 versus 25, p &lt;0.001. Groups were comparable in terms of intraoperative complications (1 during LSP vs. 3 during ThuLEP) and transfusions (1 per group). Differences in terms of operative time (156 vs. 92 minutes, p &lt;0.001), Hb-drop (-2.5 vs. -0.9g/dL, p &lt;0.001), catheterization time (5 vs. 2 days, p &lt;0.001) and postoperative complications (13.8% vs. 0, p &lt;0.001) favored ThuLEP. At median follow-up of 40 months after LSP versus 30 after ThuLEP (p &lt;0.001), Q(max) improved by 226% vs. 205% (p=0.5), IPSS decreased by 88% versus 85% (p=0.9), QoL decreased by 80% with IIEF-5 remaining almost unmodified for both the approaches.Conclusions: Our analysis showed that LSP and ThuLEP are comparable in relieving from BPO and improving the patient-reported outcomes. Invasiveness of LSP is more significant

Mapping European Association of Urology Guideline Practice Across Europe: An Audit of Androgen Deprivation Therapy Use Before Prostate Cancer Surgery in 6598 Cases in 187 Hospitals Across 31 European Countries

Peer reviewe