Skip to main content
PMC home page
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy logoLink to Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
. 1995 Aug;39(8):1655–1660. doi: 10.1128/aac.39.8.1655

Comparison of sparfloxacin, temafloxacin, and ciprofloxacin for prophylaxis and treatment of experimental foreign-body infection by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

A Cagni 1, C Chuard 1, P E Vaudaux 1, J Schrenzel 1, D P Lew 1
PMCID: PMC162802  PMID: 7486895

Abstract

The prophylactic and therapeutic activities of three broad-spectrum fluoroquinolones were evaluated in two different experimental models of foreign-body infections caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) susceptible to quinolones. In a guinea pig model of prophylaxis, subcutaneously implanted tissue cages were infected at a > 90% rate by 10(2) CFU of MRSA in control animals. A single dose of 50 mg of ciprofloxacin per kg of body weight administered intraperitoneally 3 h before bacterial challenge was less effective than an equivalent regimen of either sparfloxacin or temafloxacin in decreasing the rate of experimental infection in tissue cages challenged with increasing inocula of MRSA. In a rat model evaluating the therapy of chronic tissue cage infection caused by MRSA, the efficacy of a 7-day high-dose (50-mg/kg twice-daily) regimen of sparfloxacin, temafloxacin, or ciprofloxacin was compared to that of vancomycin (50 mg/kg twice daily). Active levels of sparfloxacin, temfloxacin, or ciprofloxacin were continuously present in tissue cage fluid during therapy, exceeding their MBCs for MRSA by 6- to 20-fold. Either temafloxacin, sparfloxacin, or vancomycin was significantly (P < 0.01) more active than ciprofloxacin in decreasing the viable counts of MRSA in tissue cage fluids. The different activities of ciprofloxacin compared with those of the other two quinolones against chronic tissue cage infections caused by MRSA did not involve the selective emergence of quinolone-resistant mutants. Temafloxacin and ciprofloxacin, which showed the most prominent differences in their in vivo activities, however, exhibited similar bactericidal properties and pharmacokinetic parameters in the rat model. In conclusion, both temafloxacin and sparfloxacin were significantly more active than ciprofloxacin for the prophylaxis or treatment of experimental foreign-body infections caused by a quinolone-susceptible strain of MRSA.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (260.1 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Aldridge K. E., Gelfand M. S., Schiro D. D., Barg N. L. The rapid emergence of fluoroquinolone-methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections in a community hospital. An in vitro look at alternative antimicrobial agents. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 1992 Sep-Oct;15(7):601–608. doi: 10.1016/0732-8893(90)90037-v. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Anwar H., Dasgupta M. K., Costerton J. W. Testing the susceptibility of bacteria in biofilms to antibacterial agents. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1990 Nov;34(11):2043–2046. doi: 10.1128/aac.34.11.2043. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bamberger D. M., Fields M. T., Herndon B. L. Efficacies of various antimicrobial agents in treatment of Staphylococcus aureus abscesses and correlation with in vitro tests of antimicrobial activity and neutrophil killing. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1991 Nov;35(11):2335–2339. doi: 10.1128/aac.35.11.2335. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Blumberg H. M., Rimland D., Carroll D. J., Terry P., Wachsmuth I. K. Rapid development of ciprofloxacin resistance in methicillin-susceptible and -resistant Staphylococcus aureus. J Infect Dis. 1991 Jun;163(6):1279–1285. doi: 10.1093/infdis/163.6.1279. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Bouchenaki N., Vaudaux P. E., Huggler E., Waldvogel F. A., Lew D. P. Successful single-dose prophylaxis of Staphylococcus aureus foreign body infections in guinea pigs by fleroxacin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1990 Jan;34(1):21–24. doi: 10.1128/aac.34.1.21. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Boyce J. M. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in hospitals and long-term care facilities: microbiology, epidemiology, and preventive measures. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1992 Dec;13(12):725–737. doi: 10.1086/648346. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Brown M. R., Collier P. J., Gilbert P. Influence of growth rate on susceptibility to antimicrobial agents: modification of the cell envelope and batch and continuous culture studies. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1990 Sep;34(9):1623–1628. doi: 10.1128/aac.34.9.1623. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Chuard C., Herrmann M., Vaudaux P., Waldvogel F. A., Lew D. P. Successful therapy of experimental chronic foreign-body infection due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus by antimicrobial combinations. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1991 Dec;35(12):2611–2616. doi: 10.1128/aac.35.12.2611. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Chuard C., Lucet J. C., Rohner P., Herrmann M., Auckenthaler R., Waldvogel F. A., Lew D. P. Resistance of Staphylococcus aureus recovered from infected foreign body in vivo to killing by antimicrobials. J Infect Dis. 1991 Jun;163(6):1369–1373. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Chuard C., Vaudaux P., Waldvogel F. A., Lew D. P. Susceptibility of Staphylococcus aureus growing on fibronectin-coated surfaces to bactericidal antibiotics. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1993 Apr;37(4):625–632. doi: 10.1128/aac.37.4.625. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Cochereau-Massin I., Bauchet J., Marrakchi-Benjaafar S., Saleh-Mghir A., Faurisson F., Vallois J. M., Vallee E., Pocidalo J. J. Efficacy and ocular penetration of sparfloxacin in experimental streptococcal endophthalmitis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1993 Apr;37(4):633–636. doi: 10.1128/aac.37.4.633. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Drusano G. L. Role of pharmacokinetics in the outcome of infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1988 Mar;32(3):289–297. doi: 10.1128/aac.32.3.289. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Dudley M. N. A review of the pharmacokinetic profile of temafloxacin. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1991 Dec;28 (Suppl 100):55–64. doi: 10.1093/jac/28.suppl_c.55. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Dworkin R., Modin G., Kunz S., Rich R., Zak O., Sande M. Comparative efficacies of ciprofloxacin, pefloxacin, and vancomycin in combination with rifampin in a rat model of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus chronic osteomyelitis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1990 Jun;34(6):1014–1016. doi: 10.1128/aac.34.6.1014. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Eng R. H., Padberg F. T., Smith S. M., Tan E. N., Cherubin C. E. Bactericidal effects of antibiotics on slowly growing and nongrowing bacteria. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1991 Sep;35(9):1824–1828. doi: 10.1128/aac.35.9.1824. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Eng R. H., Smith S. M., Buccini F. J., Cherubin C. E. Differences in ability of cell-wall antibiotics to suppress emergence of rifampicin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1985 Feb;15(2):201–207. doi: 10.1093/jac/15.2.201. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Eng R. H., Smith S. M., Tillem M., Cherubin C. Rifampin resistance. Development during the therapy of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection. Arch Intern Med. 1985 Jan;145(1):146–148. doi: 10.1001/archinte.145.1.146. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Faville R. J., Jr, Zaske D. E., Kaplan E. L., Crossley K., Sabath L. D., Quie P. G. Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis. Combined therapy with vancomycin and rifampin. JAMA. 1978 Oct 27;240(18):1963–1965. doi: 10.1001/jama.240.18.1963. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Hessen M. T., Pitsakis P. G., Kaye D. Oral temafloxacin versus vancomycin for therapy of experimental endocarditis caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1990 Jun;34(6):1143–1145. doi: 10.1128/aac.34.6.1143. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Johnson J. H., Cooper M. A., Andrews J. M., Wise R. Pharmacokinetics and inflammatory fluid penetration of sparfloxacin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1992 Nov;36(11):2444–2446. doi: 10.1128/aac.36.11.2444. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Kaatz G. W., Seo S. M., Barriere S. L., Albrecht L. M., Rybak M. J. Ciprofloxacin and rifampin, alone and in combination, for therapy of experimental Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1989 Aug;33(8):1184–1187. doi: 10.1128/aac.33.8.1184. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Kernodle D. S., Kaiser A. B. Comparative prophylactic efficacies of ciprofloxacin, ofloxacin, cefazolin, and vancomycin in experimental model of staphylococcal wound infection. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1994 Jun;38(6):1325–1330. doi: 10.1128/aac.38.6.1325. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Lucet J. C., Herrmann M., Rohner P., Auckenthaler R., Waldvogel F. A., Lew D. P. Treatment of experimental foreign body infection caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1990 Dec;34(12):2312–2317. doi: 10.1128/aac.34.12.2312. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Norden C. W., Shaffer M. Treatment of experimental chronic osteomyelitis due to staphylococcus aureus with vancomycin and rifampin. J Infect Dis. 1983 Feb;147(2):352–357. doi: 10.1093/infdis/147.2.352. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Peterson L. R., Quick J. N., Jensen B., Homann S., Johnson S., Tenquist J., Shanholtzer C., Petzel R. A., Sinn L., Gerding D. N. Emergence of ciprofloxacin resistance in nosocomial methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolates. Resistance during ciprofloxacin plus rifampin therapy for methicillin-resistant S aureus colonization. Arch Intern Med. 1990 Oct;150(10):2151–2155. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Schaad H. J., Chuard C., Vaudaux P., Rohner P., Waldvogel F. A., Lew D. P. Comparative efficacies of imipenem, oxacillin and vancomycin for therapy of chronic foreign body infection due to methicillin-susceptible and -resistant Staphylococcus aureus. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1994 Jun;33(6):1191–1200. doi: 10.1093/jac/33.6.1191. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Schaad H. J., Chuard C., Vaudaux P., Waldvogel F. A., Lew D. P. Teicoplanin alone or combined with rifampin compared with vancomycin for prophylaxis and treatment of experimental foreign body infection by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1994 Aug;38(8):1703–1710. doi: 10.1128/aac.38.8.1703. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Tebas P., Martinez Ruiz R., Roman F., Mendaza P., Rodriguez Diaz J. C., Daza R., de Letona J. M. Early resistance to rifampin and ciprofloxacin in the treatment of right-sided Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis. J Infect Dis. 1991 Jan;163(1):204–205. doi: 10.1093/infdis/163.1.204-a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Vallée E., Azoulay-Dupuis E., Pocidalo J. J., Bergogne-Bérézin E. Pharmacokinetics of four fluoroquinolones in an animal model of infected lung. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1991 Dec;28 (Suppl 100):39–44. doi: 10.1093/jac/28.suppl_c.39. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Widmer A. F., Frei R., Rajacic Z., Zimmerli W. Correlation between in vivo and in vitro efficacy of antimicrobial agents against foreign body infections. J Infect Dis. 1990 Jul;162(1):96–102. doi: 10.1093/infdis/162.1.96. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Zimmerli W., Waldvogel F. A., Vaudaux P., Nydegger U. E. Pathogenesis of foreign body infection: description and characteristics of an animal model. J Infect Dis. 1982 Oct;146(4):487–497. doi: 10.1093/infdis/146.4.487. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy are provided here courtesy of American Society for Microbiology (ASM)

RESOURCES