Antimicrobial activity of ciprofloxacin against Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Escherichia coli, and Staphylococcus aureus determined by the killing curve method: antibiotic comparisons and synergistic interactions

Chalkley, L. J.; Koornhof, H J

doi:10.1128/aac.28.2.331

Cited by 135 publications

(77 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The low performance of ciprofloxacin on nongrowing bacteria was surprising since Zeiler and Grohe [20] showed a high efficacy of this antibiotic on Escherichiacoli in1he stationary phase. However, this quality of ciprofloxacin was later shown to be specific for some gram-negative rods [21,22]. The low antistaphylococcal activity of cyprofloxacin has also been confirmed byclinical data.…”

Section: Antibiotic Discussionsupporting

confidence: 51%

Correlation between In Vivo and In Vitro Efficacy of Antimicrobial Agents against Foreign Body Infections

Widmer

Frei

Rajacic

et al. 1990

Journal of Infectious Diseases

298

186

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Antibiotic Discussionsupporting

confidence: 51%

Correlation between In Vivo and In Vitro Efficacy of Antimicrobial Agents against Foreign Body Infections

Widmer

Frei

Rajacic

et al. 1990

Journal of Infectious Diseases

298

186

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Ciprofloxacin does possess certain microbiologic qualities that are quite different from those of the beta-lactam antibiotics and which may partially offset this lack of bactericidal activity observed against P. aeruginosa and S. aureus. The drug is rapidly bactericidal at concentrations around the MBC, so that even with relatively low cidal titers in serum, maximal bactericidal rates may have been achieved (3). This agent also possesses a relatively prolonged (2-to 4-h) postantibiotic effect against some strains of P. aeruginosa and S. aureus and has good tissue penetration, as evidenced by rapid accumulation in blister fluid (8; S. Gundmundsson, B. Voelman, and W. Craig, Program Abstr.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bactericidal activity of ciprofloxacin compared with that of cefotaxime in normal volunteers

Standiford¹,

Drusano²,

Forrest³

et al. 1987

Antimicrob Agents Chemother

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We compared ciprofloxacin (200 mg) with cefotaxime (2 g) when each was administered intravenously over a 30-min period to six volunteers in a crossover manner 1 week apart. To integrate the pharmacologic and microbiologic activity, inhibitory and bactericidal activities in serum were obtained for both antibiotics 1 and 6 h after administration against 10 strains of Escherichia coli, 10 strains of Klebsiella pneumoniae, 15 strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and 10 strains each of methicillin-susceptible and -resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Geometric mean bactericidal titers for E. coli 1 h after the infusion were 1:60 for ciprofloxacin and 1:252 for cefotaxime, and for K. pneumoniae they were 1:20 and 1:256, respectively. However, geometric mean titers were poor for both antibiotics against methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (<1:2 for ciprofloxacin versus 1:5 for cefotaxime) and methicillin-resistant S. aureus (<1:2 for both antibiotics), as well as against P. aeruginosa (1:3 for ciprofloxacin versus 1:2 for cefotaxime). These data suggest that ciprofloxacin may be useful for the treatment of serious infections caused by E. coli and K. pneumoniae. However, caution is suggested when this dose of ciprofloxacin is used in situations in which septicemia is caused by P. aeruginosa or S. aureus and originates outside the urinary tract.Ciprofloxacin is a new quinoline carboxylic acid which can be administered orally or intravenously. Results of previous microbiologic studies have shown that this compound has a broad spectrum of activity, encompassing members of the family Enterobacteriaceae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and methicillin-susceptible and -resistant Staphylococcus aureus (1,4,5). This suggests that it has the potential for singleagent therapy for serious bacterial infections. Therefore, to test this potential prior to clinical trials, we compared the bactericidal activity of ciprofloxacin in serum with that of a control regimen, cefotaxime, after each was administered intravenously to normal volunteers. Determination of the bactericidal activity in serum is a method used to integrate the microbiologic activity with many of the pharmacologic characteristics of the antibiotic, including the effect of the metabolites, and has been used in previous studies to compare experimental regimens with standards (10, 19-21). Additionally, in some studies it has been shown that there is a correlation between clinical effectiveness and bactericidal activity in serum, as performed by the Stratton-Reller technique, the method that was used in this evaluation (17, 21, 25). MATERIALS AND METHODSVolunteer studies. Six normal male volunteers (age, 21 to 35 years; weight, 74 to 90 kg), who were fully informed before the study, received ciprofloxacin and cefotaxime in a randomized crossover manner, with at least 6 days elapsing between each drug administration. Ciprofloxacin (200 mg) or cefotaxime (2 g) was infused intravenously via a Harvard Pump (Harvard Apparatus, Inc.) over 30 min. Blood was obtained for the serum inhibitory and b...

show abstract

“…Concerns have been expressed regarding the efficacy of ciprofloxacin for serious infections due to S. aureus (3). In this trial, there were no significant differences between ofloxacin and parenteral therapy for chronic osteomyelitis due to susceptible strains of S. aureus.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 79%

Ofloxacin versus parenteral therapy for chronic osteomyelitis

Gentry

Rodriguez-Gomez

1991

Antimicrob Agents Chemother

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We conducted a randomized comparison of oral ofloxacin (400 mg twice a day) and parenteral agents (cefazolin, 1.0 g intravenously every 8 h, or ceftazidime, 2.0 g intravenously every 12 h) in biopsy-confirmed, nonprosthesis osteomyelitis. A total of 19 subjects received ofloxacin for an average of 8 weeks, and 14 received parenteral antibiotics for an average of 4 weeks; both therapies were well tolerated. Infections were due to Staphylococcus aureus (40%), Enterococcus spp. (3%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (15%), and other gram-negative organisms (42%). At the completion of therapy, one P. aeruginosa infection in the ofloxacin group persisted and the organism acquired resistance, accompanied by a resistant Acinetobacter superinfection. In the parenteral group, one S. aureus infection persisted, and there was a resolved superinfection due to S. aureus as well. Eighteen-month follow-up data have been obtained. Among those treated with ofloxacin, four subjects whose initial response to therapy was successful suffered relapses of infection, three due to S. aureus and one due to P. aeruginosa, while in the parenteral group, one subject with a P. aeruginosa infection relapsed. Long-term response to therapy was successful for 14 of 19 (74%) subjects who received ofloxacin and 12 of 14 (86%) who received parenteral antibiotics; the difference was not significant. Oral ofloxacin appears comparable to parenteral antibiotics in chronic osteomyelitis due to susceptible organisms, and oral ofloxacin offers advantages in economics and convenience.

show abstract

Antimicrobial activity of ciprofloxacin against Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Escherichia coli, and Staphylococcus aureus determined by the killing curve method: antibiotic comparisons and synergistic interactions

Cited by 135 publications

References 15 publications

Correlation between In Vivo and In Vitro Efficacy of Antimicrobial Agents against Foreign Body Infections

Correlation between In Vivo and In Vitro Efficacy of Antimicrobial Agents against Foreign Body Infections

Bactericidal activity of ciprofloxacin compared with that of cefotaxime in normal volunteers

Ofloxacin versus parenteral therapy for chronic osteomyelitis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About