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: Penetration and effectiveness of prophylactic fluoroquinolones in experimental methicillin-sensitive or methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus anterior chamber infections.
    Author: Balzli CL, Caballero AR, Tang A, Weeks AC, O'Callaghan RJ.
    Journal: J Cataract Refract Surg; 2010 Dec; 36(12):2160-7. PubMed ID: 21111321.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To determine the effectiveness of moxifloxacin and besifloxacin prophylactic therapy for experimental Staphylococcus aureus infections originating in the rabbit anterior chamber. SETTING: Microbiology Department, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, Mississippi, USA. DESIGN: Experimental study. METHODS: Minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of moxifloxacin 0.5% and besifloxacin 0.6% for methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) strains were determined. Eyes were treated with moxifloxacin, a moxifloxacin alternative formulation 0.5%, or besifloxacin (45 μL) 30 minutes or 60 minutes before anterior chamber infection (10(6) colony-forming units [CFUs]). Aqueous humor was removed 30 minutes after infection for quantification of antibiotic and bacteria. RESULTS: The MIC for both organisms was 0.06 μg/mL for moxifloxacin and 0.03 μg/mL for besifloxacin. In MSSA infections, the untreated eyes contained 5.18 log CFU/mL, which was similar to besifloxacin-treated eyes with either treatment (P≥.1091). Eyes treated with moxifloxacin or moxifloxacin alternative formulation contained significantly fewer CFUs than untreated controls or besifloxacin-treated eyes with either treatment (P≤.0020). The aqueous humor in eyes treated with moxifloxacin or moxifloxacin alternative formulation contained significantly more drug than besifloxacin-treated eyes at both prophylactic time points (P≤.0012). In MRSA infections, the untreated eyes contained 4.91 log CFU/mL, which was similar to besifloxacin-treated eyes with either treatment (P≥.5830). Eyes treated with moxifloxacin or moxifloxacin alternative formulation contained significantly fewer CFUs than untreated controls or besifloxacin-treated eyes at both prophylactic time points (P≤.0008). CONCLUSIONS: Moxifloxacin had greater in vivo effectiveness against MSSA and MRSA than besifloxacin. The aqueous antibiotic concentrations suggest limited penetration by besifloxacin, accounting for its lack of effectiveness.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]