Lack of in vitro efficacy of oral forms of certain cephalosporins, erythromycin, and oxacillin against Pasteurella multocida | Zendy

Ellie J. C. Goldstein | Zendy; Diane M. Citron | Zendy; G. A. Richwald | Zendy

Open Access

Lack of in vitro efficacy of oral forms of certain cephalosporins, erythromycin, and oxacillin against Pasteurella multocida

Author(s) -

Ellie J. C. Goldstein,

Diane M. Citron,

G. A. Richwald

Publication year - 1988

Publication title -

antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy

Language(s) - English

Resource type - Journals

SCImago Journal Rank - 2.07

H-Index - 259

eISSN - 1070-6283

pISSN - 0066-4804

DOI - 10.1128/aac.32.2.213

Subject(s) - cefaclor , pasteurella multocida , microbiology and biotechnology , penicillin , cephalosporin , ampicillin , erythromycin , clindamycin , cefuroxime , medicine , antibiotics , biology , bacteria , genetics

The in vitro susceptibility of human isolates of Pasteurella multocida to oral antimicrobial agents from our current study and from a review of the literature suggests that dicloxacillin (oxacillin), erythromycin, clindamycin, cephalexin, cefaclor, and cefadroxil should not be used for empiric therapy of animal bite wounds. Agents that were consistently active against P. multocida were penicillin, ampicillin, amoxicillin-clavulanic acid, tetracycline, minocycline, chloramphenicol, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, and cefuroxime. Possible reasons for the confusion regarding the activity of oral cephalosporins are addressed.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.

Having issues? You can contact us here

Accelerating Research