ArticleBMC pharmacology & toxicology2020
Levofloxacin-ceftazidime administration regimens combat Pseudomonas aeruginosa in the hollow-fiber infection model simulating abnormal renal function in critically ill patients.
Article in BMC pharmacology & toxicology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Can precision antibiotic prescribing help prevent the spread of carbapenem-resistant organisms in the hospital setting?JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2023Review
- The Application of Hollow Fiber Cartridge in Biomedicine.Pharmaceutics · 2022Review
- Experimental Validation of a Mathematical Framework to Simulate Antibiotics with Distinct Half-Lives Concurrently in an In Vitro Model.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Clinical efficacy of ceftazidime combined with levofloxacin on heart failure complicated with pulmonary infection and its influence on cardiopulmonary function.American journal of translational research · 2021Article
- Pharmacodynamics of Linezolid Plus Fosfomycin Against Vancomycin-ResistantFrontiers in microbiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of this study was to investigate the bactericidal effects of levofloxacin and ceftazidime as both monotherapy and combination therapy, and to determine their effects on resistance suppression in patients with normal and abnormal (Ccr:16-20 mL/min) renal function. Common clinical administration regimens to provide reference values were further evaluated.
methodsThe 7-d hollow-fiber infection model was used to inject the Pseudomonas aeruginosa standard strain (ATCC27853), which simulated common clinical administration regimens for patients with different renal function. Ten regimens were stratified into 2 categories based on renal function, and each category contained 3 monotherapy regimens and 2 combination therapy regimens. Total and resistant populations were quantified. Drug concentrations were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC).
resultsMonotherapy regimens resulted in about 0.5-log-CFU/mL bacterial kill in the total population at 6 or 8 h, whilst combination regimens resulted in 2- to 3-log-CFU/mL within 2 days. For levofloxacin monotherapy regimens in patients with normal renal function, resistance emergence was seen after 6 h, and was seen at 0 h in the ceftazidime monotherapy regimen, as well as in all regimens of patients with abnormal renal function. Although resistant subpopulation in combination regimens with abnormal renal function began to increase at 0 h, there was a definite downward trend after 8 h, while resistant population in the normal renal function group increased after 16 h.
conclusionsCombination therapy had greater bactericidal efficacy and resistance inhibition compared with monotherapy. Studying combination regimens in randomized clinical trials is warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.