2009ChemotherapyRequires access

Agar (Disk) Diffusion Test Susceptibility of Clinical Isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa to Azlocillin, Cefotaxime, Cefsulodin, Lamoxactam, Mezlocillin, and Piperacillin

Walter H. Traub

Open publisher page 4 citations

Abstract

The standardized Bauer-Kirby agar diffusion test served to examine 100 clinical isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa against various recently introduced broad-spectrum penicillins and cephalosporins. Neither cefotaxime nor lamoxactam displayed significant activity against this microorganism. Azlocillin, cefsulodin, and piperacillin were significantly more effective (p less than 0.0001) than mezlocillin against the majority of isolates. When compared individually, azlocillin and piperacillin displayed comparable in vitro activity; the same was true for cefsulodin compared with piperacillin. On the other hand, cefsulodin was somewhat more active than azlocillin (p less than 0.05, greater than 0.01) against P. aeruginosa. These data should enable diagnostic laboratories to curtail the number of antimicrobial drugs routinely utilized to examine clinical isolates of P. aeruginosa for antibiotic susceptibility, i.e., piperacillin exclusively.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The standardized Bauer-Kirby agar diffusion test served to examine 100 clinical isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa against various recently introduced broad-spectrum penicillins and cephalosporins. Neither cefotaxime nor lamoxactam displayed significant activity against this microorganism. Azlocillin, cefsulodin, and piperacillin were significantly more effective (p less than 0.0001) than mezlocillin against the majority of isolates. When compared individually, azlocillin and piperacillin displayed comparable in vitro activity; the same was true for cefsulodin compared with piperacillin. On the other hand, cefsulodin was somewhat more active than azlocillin (p less than 0.05, greater than 0.01) against P. aeruginosa. These data should enable diagnostic laboratories to curtail the number of antimicrobial drugs routinely utilized to examine clinical isolates of P. aeruginosa for antibiotic susceptibility, i.e., piperacillin exclusively.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 4 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The standardized Bauer-Kirby agar diffusion test served to examine 100 clinical isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa against various recently introduced broad-spectrum penicillins and cephalosporins. Neither cefotaxime nor lamoxactam displayed significant activity against this microorganism. Azlocillin, cefsulodin, and piperacillin were significantly more effective (p less than 0.0001) than mezlocillin against the majority of isolates. When compared individually, azlocillin and piperacillin displayed comparable in vitro activity; the same was true for cefsulodin compared with piperacillin. On the other hand, cefsulodin was somewhat more active than azlocillin (p less than 0.05, greater than 0.01) against P. aeruginosa. These data should enable diagnostic laboratories to curtail the number of antimicrobial drugs routinely utilized to examine clinical isolates of P. aeruginosa for antibiotic susceptibility, i.e., piperacillin exclusively.

Key concepts: Cefsulodin, Azlocillin, Piperacillin, Mezlocillin, Cefotaxime, Microbiology, Cephalosporin, Pseudomonas aeruginosa

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Agar (Disk) Diffusion Test Susceptibility of Clinical Isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa to Azlocillin, Cefotaxime, Cefsulodin, Lamoxactam, Mezlocillin, and Piperacillin — Research Paper | ScholarLens