English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The activities of sparfloxacin, levofloxacin, Bay y 3118, azithromycin, cefprozil, loracarbef, and nine other oral antimicrobial agents against 194 aerobic and anaerobic clinical bite wound isolates were determined by the agar dilution method. Sparfloxacin, levofloxacin, and Bay y 3118 were active against all aerobic isolates (MICs at which 90% of the isolates are inhibited [MIC90], &lt; or = 1.0 microgram/ml for sparfloxacin and levofloxacin and 0.1 microgram/ml for Bay y 3118) and many anaerobic isolates, with the exception of the fusobacteria. Azithromycin was more active than erythromycin by 1 to 2 dilutions against many aerobes, including Pasteurella multocida and Eikenella corrodens, and by 2 to 4 dilutions against anaerobic isolates. Cefprozil was more active (MIC90, &lt; or = 1 microgram/ml) than loracarbef (MIC90, &lt; or = 4 micrograms/ml) against aerobic gram-positive isolates, but both had poor activity (MIC90, &gt; or = 16 micrograms/ml) against peptostreptococci. Both cefprozil and loracarbef had MIC90s of &lt; or = 0.5 micrograms/ml against P. multocida.

antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy

Comparative in vitro activities of azithromycin, Bay y 3118, levofloxacin, sparfloxacin, and 11 other oral antimicrobial agents against 194 aerobic and anaerobic bite wound isolates