Skip to main content
PMC home page
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy logoLink to Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
. 1992 Jan;36(1):239–243. doi: 10.1128/aac.36.1.239

In vitro activities of three of the newer quinolones against anaerobic bacteria.

H M Wexler 1, E Molitoris 1, S M Finegold 1
PMCID: PMC189287  PMID: 1317149

Abstract

The antimicrobial activities of three new quinolone compounds, sparfloxacin, temafloxacin, and WIN 57273, against anaerobic bacteria were determined in three separate studies. The Wadsworth agar dilution technique using brucella-laked blood agar was used throughout. The activities of other antimicrobial agents, including ciprofloxacin, imipenem, chloramphenicol, metronidazole, cefotetan, cefoxitin, and amoxicillin-clavulanic acid, were also determined. The breakpoints of the new quinolones were 2 micrograms/ml for sparfloxacin and WIN 57273 and 4 micrograms/ml for temafloxacin. WIN 57273 displayed very good activity against anaerobes, inhibiting all strains of Bacteroides fragilis group species at 2 micrograms/ml. Only two strains of Fusobacterium species were resistant (MIC, 4 micrograms/ml). Sparfloxacin inhibited 78% of B. fragilis strains and 44% of other B. fragilis group isolates at 2 micrograms/ml. At 2 micrograms/ml, the percentages of other anaerobic species susceptible were as follows: B. gracilis, 70%; other Bacteroides species, 61%; Clostridium species, 50%; Fusobacterium species, 70%; Peptostreptococcus species, 91%; non-spore-forming gram-positive rods, 71%. Temafloxacin inhibited 91% of B. fragilis strains and 87% of other B. fragilis group species at 4 micrograms/ml. All strains of other Bacteroides species, 78% of Fusobacterium species, 80% of Clostridium species, and 90% of Peptostreptococcus species were inhibited at 4 micrograms of temafloxacin per ml.

Full text

PDF
241

Selected References

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

  1. Clarke A. M., Zemcov S. J. Comparative in vitro activity of lomefloxacin, a new difluoroquinolone. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 1989 Feb;8(2):164–168. doi: 10.1007/BF01963905. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Fernandes P. B., Shipkowitz N., Bower R. R., Jarvis K. P., Weisz J., Chu D. T. In-vitro and in-vivo potency of five new fluoroquinolones against anaerobic bacteria. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1986 Dec;18(6):693–701. doi: 10.1093/jac/18.6.693. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Fox A. R., Phillips I. The antibiotic sensitivity of the Bacteroides fragilis group in the United Kingdom. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1987 Oct;20(4):477–488. doi: 10.1093/jac/20.4.477. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Goldstein E. J., Citron D. M. Comparative activity of the quinolones against anaerobic bacteria isolated at community hospitals. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1985 Apr;27(4):657–659. doi: 10.1128/aac.27.4.657. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Jones B. M., Geary I., Lee M. E., Duerden B. I. Activity of pefloxacin and thirteen other antimicrobial agents in vitro against isolates from hospital and genitourinary infections. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1986 Jun;17(6):739–746. doi: 10.1093/jac/17.6.739. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. King A., Phillips I. The comparative in-vitro activity of eight newer quinolones and nalidixic acid. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1986 Nov;18 (Suppl 500):1–20. doi: 10.1093/jac/18.supplement_d.1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Sutter V. L., Kwok Y. Y., Bulkacz J. Comparative activity of ciprofloxacin against anaerobic bacteria. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1985 Mar;27(3):427–428. doi: 10.1128/aac.27.3.427. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Watt B., Brown F. V. Is ciprofloxacin active against clinically important anaerobes? J Antimicrob Chemother. 1986 May;17(5):605–613. doi: 10.1093/jac/17.5.605. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Wexler H. M., Finegold S. M. Antimicrobial resistance in Bacteroides. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1987 Feb;19(2):143–146. doi: 10.1093/jac/19.2.143. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Wexler H. M. Susceptibility testing of anaerobic bacteria: myth, magic, or method? Clin Microbiol Rev. 1991 Oct;4(4):470–484. doi: 10.1128/cmr.4.4.470. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Whiting J. L., Cheng N., Chow A. W. Interactions of ciprofloxacin with clindamycin, metronidazole, cefoxitin, cefotaxime, and mezlocillin against gram-positive and gram-negative anaerobic bacteria. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1987 Sep;31(9):1379–1382. doi: 10.1128/aac.31.9.1379. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

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

RESOURCES