These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: In vitro activity of clinafloxacin in comparison with other quinolones against Stenotrophomonas maltophilia clinical isolates in the presence and absence of reserpine.
    Author: Ribera A, Jurado A, Ruiz J, Marco F, Del Valle O, Mensa J, Chaves J, Hernández G, Jiménez de Anta MT, Vila J.
    Journal: Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis; 2002 Feb; 42(2):123-8. PubMed ID: 11858908.
    Abstract:
    A total of 33 Stenotrophomonas maltophilia clinical isolates were tested for their susceptibility to clinafloxacin in comparison with ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, moxifloxacin, nalidixic acid, norfloxacin, sparfloxacin and trovafloxacin. The MIC(50) and MIC(90) were as follows: ciprofloxacin 4 and 64 microg/mL; clinafoxacin 0.5 and 4 microg/mL; levofloxacin 2 and 32 microg/mL; moxifloxacin 1 and 8 microg/mL; nalidixic acid 8 and 128 microg/mL; norfloxacin 64 and 256 microg/mL; sparfloxacin 1 and 16 microg/mL; and trovafloxacin 1 and 8 microg/mL. Clinafloxacin was the most active quinolone, with only a 15.1% of strains showing resistance. When the MICs were determined in the presence of 25 microg/ml of reserpine, the MIC(90) of trovafloxacin and moxifloxacin did not change, whereas decreased 2-fold for clinafloxacin, levofloxacin, sparfloxacin and nalidixic acid, and 4- and 8-fold for ciprofloxacin and norfloxacin respectively. No clinafloxacin-resistant strains were observed when the MIC was performed in the presence of reserpine. Therefore, clinafloxacin shows the better "in vitro"activity against these 33 strains of S.maltophilia.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]