2015
DOI: 10.1111/jvp.12271
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

In vivo activity of cefquinome against Riemerella anatipestifer using the pericarditis model in the duck

Abstract: Cefquinome is a fourth-generation cephalosporin with broad-spectrum antibacterial activity, including activity against enteric gram-negative bacilli such as Riemerella anatipestifer. The pericarditis model was used to examine the pharmacodynamic characteristics of cefquinome against R. anatipestifer. Serum levels of cefquinome following the administration of different doses were determined by LC-MS/MS. Ducks with ca. 10(6) CFU/mL at the initiation of therapy were treated with cefquinome at doses that ranged fr… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
4
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
1
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The in vitro efficacy of CFQ for these pathogens has been reported by various workers (Batzias, 2009;Chin, Gu, Fang, & Neu, 1992;Ehinger, Schmidt, & Kietzmann, 2006;FDA, 2006;Limbert et al, 1991;Luhofer et al, 2004;Meyns, Croubels, Verheyen, Sustronck, & Maes, 2006;Murphy, Erwin, & Jones, 1994;Thomas et al, 2006). (Gu et al, 2015;Guo et al, 2015;Qiu et al, 2016;Shan, Liang, Wang, Li, & Zeng, 2014;Wang et al, 2014). In this study, % (Roberts et al, 2010;Smiet, Haritova, Heil, Fink-Gremmels, & Wijnberg, 2012;Zhang et al, 2014) have been recommended in critically ill patients and patients with compromised immune responses.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 54%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The in vitro efficacy of CFQ for these pathogens has been reported by various workers (Batzias, 2009;Chin, Gu, Fang, & Neu, 1992;Ehinger, Schmidt, & Kietzmann, 2006;FDA, 2006;Limbert et al, 1991;Luhofer et al, 2004;Meyns, Croubels, Verheyen, Sustronck, & Maes, 2006;Murphy, Erwin, & Jones, 1994;Thomas et al, 2006). (Gu et al, 2015;Guo et al, 2015;Qiu et al, 2016;Shan, Liang, Wang, Li, & Zeng, 2014;Wang et al, 2014). In this study, % (Roberts et al, 2010;Smiet, Haritova, Heil, Fink-Gremmels, & Wijnberg, 2012;Zhang et al, 2014) have been recommended in critically ill patients and patients with compromised immune responses.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 54%
“…In this study, the hypothetical MIC values (0.125‐2 μg/ml), which based on MIC 90 values of 0.016‐1 μg/ml reported for susceptible pathogens above and the susceptibility breakpoint of 2 μg/ml recommended by the AVID (Working Group for Veterinary Medicines and Diagnosis of Infections) in Germany (AVID, ), were used to calculate %T > MIC. Studies recommend T > MIC values of 40%–70% for CFQ (Gu et al., ; Guo et al., ; Qiu et al., ; Shan, Liang, Wang, Li, & Zeng, ; Wang et al., ). In this study, % T > MIC values for two administration routes were calculated using V darea determined following IV administration of CFQ.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since the susceptibility breakpoint of CFQ was reported as 2 μg/ml (AVID, 1999), in this study, % T > MIC was calculated up to this value. The T > MIC values of 40 to 73% for the therapeutic efficacy of CFQ were recommended (Gu et al, 2015;Guo et al, 2015;Li et al, 2016;Qiu et al, 2016;Shan, Liang, Wang, Li, & Zeng, 2014;Wang et al, 2014;Xiao et al, 2015;Zhang et al, 2019). In this study, CFQ administration alone at a dose of 2 mg/kg every 24 hr maintained the mean T > MIC value of 50.50 (49-54)% for bacteria, with MIC values of ≤0.5 µg/ ml.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 54%
“…In this study, T > MIC was calculated using the hypothetical MIC values (0.125–2 μg/mL) that were established based on MIC 90 values of 0.016–2 μg/mL reported for susceptible horse pathogens (Thomas et al ., ) and the susceptibility breakpoint of 2 μg/mL. In vitro and in vivo animal data support T > MIC values of 40–70% between CFQ doses (Shan et al ., ; Wang et al ., ; Gu et al ., ; Guo et al ., ; Qiu et al ., ). This pharmacodynamic target was provided by the administration of 1, 2, 4, and 6 mg/kg doses of CFQ at 12‐h intervals, with MIC values of ≤0.25, ≤0.5, ≤1, and ≤1, respectively, for bacteria (Table ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%