Jones R N, Fuchs P C, Gavan T L, Gerlach E H, Barry A, Thornsberry C
J Antibiot (Tokyo). 1977 Jul;30(7):576-82. doi: 10.7164/antibiotics.30.576.
The in vitro activity of Compound BL-S786 was compared with that of cephalothin against 5,762 clinical isolates by the microdilution broth method. BL-S786 demonstrated a broader spectrum and a significantly lower MIC against the Enterobacteriaceae. Although greater susceptibility to BL-S786 than to cephalothin was exhibited by Serratia marcescens, Proteus morganii and Proteus vulgaris, these three species were generally resistant to both drugs. By contrast, the staphylococci were significantly more susceptible to cephalothin than to BL-S786. Resistance to both drugs was demonstrated by Pseudomonas aeruginosa and other pseudomonads, enterococci and Bacteroides fragilis.
采用微量稀释肉汤法,比较了化合物BL-S786与头孢噻吩对5762株临床分离菌的体外活性。BL-S786对肠杆菌科细菌显示出更广泛的抗菌谱和显著更低的最低抑菌浓度(MIC)。虽然粘质沙雷氏菌、摩根氏变形杆菌和普通变形杆菌对BL-S786的敏感性高于头孢噻吩,但这三个菌种通常对两种药物均耐药。相比之下,葡萄球菌对头孢噻吩的敏感性明显高于BL-S786。铜绿假单胞菌及其他假单胞菌、肠球菌和脆弱拟杆菌对两种药物均耐药。