Suppr超能文献

头孢氨苄、头孢拉定和头孢克洛的体外活性比较。

Comparison of in vitro activity of cephalexin, cephradine, and cefaclor.

作者信息

Bill N J, Washington J A

出版信息

Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1977 Mar;11(3):470-4. doi: 10.1128/AAC.11.3.470.

Abstract

Inhibitory activity of cephalexin, cephradine, and cefaclor was compared by the WHO-ICS agar dilution technique. Cefaclor was substantially more active against staphylococci, streptococci, gonococci, meningococci, Haemophilus, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Citrobacter diversus, Proteus mirabilis, salmonellae, and shigellae than was cephalexin, which in turn was more active than cephradine. Cefaclor appeared to be less resistant to staphylococcal penicillinase than did the other two agents. None of these cephalosporins was active against Enterobacter, Serratia, indole-positive Proteeae, Pseudomonas, or Bacteroides fragilis.

摘要

采用世界卫生组织国际化学学会琼脂稀释技术比较了头孢氨苄、头孢拉定和头孢克洛的抑制活性。与头孢氨苄相比,头孢克洛对葡萄球菌、链球菌、淋球菌、脑膜炎球菌、嗜血杆菌、大肠杆菌、肺炎克雷伯菌、奇异变形杆菌、沙门氏菌和志贺氏菌的活性要强得多,而头孢氨苄的活性又比头孢拉定强。头孢克洛似乎比其他两种药物对葡萄球菌青霉素酶的耐药性更低。这些头孢菌素对肠杆菌、沙雷氏菌、吲哚阳性变形杆菌、假单胞菌或脆弱拟杆菌均无活性。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

2
Characterization of the Neisseria meningitidis Helicase RecG.脑膜炎奈瑟菌解旋酶RecG的特性分析
PLoS One. 2016 Oct 13;11(10):e0164588. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0164588. eCollection 2016.
5
The cephalosporins: activity and clinical use.头孢菌素类:活性与临床应用
Drugs. 1980 Aug;20(2):137-54. doi: 10.2165/00003495-198020020-00007.

本文引用的文献

1
Antimicrobial susceptibility of Haemophilus influenzae.流感嗜血杆菌的抗菌药敏性
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1974 Nov;6(5):620-4. doi: 10.1128/AAC.6.5.620.
2
Cephradine. Antibacterial activity and clinical effectiveness.
Chemotherapy. 1973;18(3):191-204. doi: 10.1159/000221261.
3
Clinical evaluation of cephradine, a new oral cephalosporin.新型口服头孢菌素头孢拉定的临床评估
Am J Med Sci. 1974 Feb;267(2):111-6. doi: 10.1097/00000441-197402000-00005.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验