Literature DB >> 989536

Resistance to nalidixic acid. A misconception due to underdosage.

T A Stamey, J Bragonje.   

Abstract

The clinical impression of inordinate selection of resistant mutants to nalidixic acid cannot be substantiated on close scrutiny when sensitive infections are treated at a full dosage of 4 gm/day. When 27 consecutive patients were treated with 4 gm of nalidixic acid per day, resistance developed in the bacteriuric population in only 7%. Moreover, resistance in the fecal reservoir was surprisingly minimal and much less than that reported for sulfonamides, tetracyclines, and ampicillin. The observation is important because multiply-resistant Enterobacteriaceae maintain their sensitivity to nalidixic acid since extrachromosomal R-factor resistance to nalidixic acid has never been demonstrated and cannot be transferred from one organism to another. In vitro data on 100 sensitive strains of Enterobacteriaceae show that the developmental of resistance to nalidixic acid is inversely proportional to the concentration of nalidixic acid regardless of whether the inoculum size is 10(5) or 10(8) bacteria per milliliter. Underdosage (less than 4 gm/day) with nalidixic acid is the probable cause of excessive resistance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1976        PMID: 989536

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  21 in total

1.  Doctors' notes to employers and insurers.

Authors:  A Cott; W M Goldberg
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  1985-10       Impact factor: 3.275

2.  Determination of optimal dosage regimen for amikacin in healthy volunteers by study of pharmacokinetics and bactericidal activity.

Authors:  R Garraffo; H B Drugeon; P Dellamonica; E Bernard; P Lapalus
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1990-04       Impact factor: 5.191

3.  Convention cities: Seattle.

Authors:  D Wishart
Journal:  Can Med Assoc J       Date:  1984-08-15       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 4.  The emergence of antibiotic resistance: myths and facts in clinical practice.

Authors:  J M Hamilton-Miller
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 17.440

5.  Factors governing the emergence of resistance to nalidixic acid in treatment of urinary tract infection.

Authors:  D Greenwood; F O'Grady
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1977-12       Impact factor: 5.191

6.  The place of quinolones in antibacterial therapy in hospitals.

Authors:  R P Mouton
Journal:  Pharm Weekbl Sci       Date:  1986-02-21

7.  Comparative efficacy and safety of nalidixic acid versus trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole in treatment of acute urinary tract infections in college-age women.

Authors:  A Iravani; G A Richard; H Baer; R Fennell
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1981-04       Impact factor: 5.191

8.  In vitro activity of ciprofloxacin, a new carboxyquinoline antimicrobial agent.

Authors:  G M Eliopoulos; A Gardella; R C Moellering
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1984-03       Impact factor: 5.191

9.  Pharmacokinetics of Continuous Infusion Meropenem With Concurrent Extracorporeal Life Support and Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy: A Case Report.

Authors:  Jeffrey J Cies; Wayne S Moore; Susan B Conley; Mindy J Dickerman; Christine Small; Dominick Carella; Paul Shea; Jason Parker; Arun Chopra
Journal:  J Pediatr Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2016 Jan-Feb

10.  Activity of flumequine against Escherichia coli: in vitro comparison with nalidixic and oxolinic acids.

Authors:  D Greenwood
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1978-03       Impact factor: 5.191

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.