145 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3091634)
1. Disk diffusion susceptibility testing of two macrolide antimicrobial agents: revised interpretive criteria for erythromycin and preliminary guidelines for roxithromycin (RU 965).
Jones RN; Barry AL; Fuchs PC; Thornsberry C
J Clin Microbiol; 1986 Aug; 24(2):233-9. PubMed ID: 3091634
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Validation of NCCLS macrolide (azithromycin, clarithromycin, and erythromycin) interpretive criteria for Haemophilus influenzae tested with the Haemophilus test medium. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards.
Jones RN; Doern GV; Gerlach EH; Hindler J; Erwin ME
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis; 1994 Apr; 18(4):243-9. PubMed ID: 7924221
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. [In vitro activity of roxithromycin against hospital bacteria and the concordance curve].
Soussy CJ; Chanal M; Kitzis MD; Duval J; Cluzel R; Acar JF
Pathol Biol (Paris); 1988 May; 36(5):420-4. PubMed ID: 2900488
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. [Comparative in vitro bacteriostatic and bactericidal effect of 5 macrolides: roxithromycin, erythromycin, oleandomycin, josamycin and spiramycin against 284 hospital bacterial strains].
Le Noc P; Croize J; Bryskier A; Le Noc D; Robert J
Pathol Biol (Paris); 1989 Jun; 37(5 Pt 2):553-9. PubMed ID: 2797879
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Quality control parameters and interpretive criteria for in vitro susceptibility tests with the macrolide azithromycin. Collaborative Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing Group.
Barry AL; Thornsberry C; Gavan TL
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis; 1989 Jun; 8(6):544-9. PubMed ID: 2548865
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Roxithromycin alone and in combination with sulphamethoxazole against Haemophilus influenzae.
Lapointe JR; Lavallée C; Meilleur R; Bourget C
J Antimicrob Chemother; 1987 Nov; 20 Suppl B():21-9. PubMed ID: 3501425
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Postantibiotic effect of roxithromycin, erythromycin, and clindamycin against selected gram-positive bacteria and Haemophilus influenzae.
Kuenzi B; Segessenmann C; Gerber AU
J Antimicrob Chemother; 1987 Nov; 20 Suppl B():39-46. PubMed ID: 3501426
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Reevaluation of interpretive criteria for Haemophilus influenzae by using meropenem (10-microgram), imipenem (10-microgram), and ampicillin (2- and 10-microgram) disks.
Zerva L; Biedenbach DJ; Jones RN
J Clin Microbiol; 1996 Aug; 34(8):1970-4. PubMed ID: 8818892
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. In vitro activity of the new macrolide antibiotic roxithromycin (RU 28965) against clinical isolates of Haemophilus influenzae.
Jorgensen JH; Redding JS; Howell AW
Antimicrob Agents Chemother; 1986 May; 29(5):921-2. PubMed ID: 3488019
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Studies to optimize the in vitro testing of piperacillin combined with tazobactam (YTR 830).
Jones RN; Barry AL
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis; 1989; 12(6):495-510. PubMed ID: 2560422
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [In vitro activity of roxithromycin, new semisynthetic macrolide against obligate anaerobes].
Dubreuil L; Devos J; Romond C; Bryskier A
Pathol Biol (Paris); 1986 May; 34(5):440-4. PubMed ID: 3534717
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. In-vitro activity of RU 28965, a new macrolide, compared to that of erythromycin.
Rolston KV; LeBlanc B; Ho DH
J Antimicrob Chemother; 1986 Feb; 17(2):161-3. PubMed ID: 3700283
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Development of interpretive criteria and quality control limits for macrolide and clindamycin susceptibility testing of Streptococcus pneumoniae.
Jorgensen JH; Swenson JM; Tenover FC; Barry A; Ferraro MJ; Murray PR; Reller LB
J Clin Microbiol; 1996 Nov; 34(11):2679-84. PubMed ID: 8897164
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. In vitro activities of azithromycin (CP 62,993), clarithromycin (A-56268; TE-031), erythromycin, roxithromycin, and clindamycin.
Barry AL; Jones RN; Thornsberry C
Antimicrob Agents Chemother; 1988 May; 32(5):752-4. PubMed ID: 2840016
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Antibacterial activity of roxithromycin: a laboratory evaluation.
Chantot JF; Bryskier A; Gasc JC
J Antibiot (Tokyo); 1986 May; 39(5):660-8. PubMed ID: 3733515
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Interpretive criteria for CI-960, fleroxacin and temafloxacin susceptibility tests with Haemophilus influenzae.
Barrett MS; Jones RN
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis; 1992 May; 11(5):462-5. PubMed ID: 1330563
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparative in vitro activity of A-56268.
Sefton AM; Maskell JP; Yong FJ; Chi SJ; Williams JD
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis; 1988 Dec; 7(6):798-802. PubMed ID: 2975218
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. In vitro comparison of the activity of RU 28965, a new macrolide, with that of erythromycin against aerobic and anaerobic bacteria.
Barlam T; Neu HC
Antimicrob Agents Chemother; 1984 Apr; 25(4):529-31. PubMed ID: 6732223
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Interpretive criteria for temocillin disk diffusion susceptibility testing.
Fuchs PC; Barry AL; Thornsberry C; Jones RN
Eur J Clin Microbiol; 1985 Feb; 4(1):30-3. PubMed ID: 3872793
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Interpretive criteria for susceptibility tests with DU-6859a and FK-037 tested against Haemophilus influenzae and Neisseria gonorrhoeae.
Jones RN; Barrett MS; Biedenbach DJ
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis; 1994 Jun; 19(2):93-9. PubMed ID: 7805362
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
