Abstract
The effectiveness of cefazolin in Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis has been questioned because of in vitro inactivation by staphylococcal beta-lactamase. Cefazolin, although inactivated in vitro by S. aureus beta-lactamase, was as effective as cephalothin in the treatment of left-sided S. aureus endocarditis in rabbits. Cefazolin (20 mg/kg every 6 or 8 h), cephalothin (40 mg/kg every 6 h), and methicillin (40 mg/kg every 6 h), administered intramuscularly, were compared in the treatment of left-sided endocarditis caused in rabbits by a highly penicillin-resistant strain of S. aureus. The three antibiotics were all effective in reducing titers in vegetations. However, at the dose used, methicillin reduced the titers more rapidly than cephalothin or cefazolin. Cefazolin concentrations in serum were about double those achieved with cephalothin or methicillin. However, cefazolin was only half as active as methicillin and one-eighth as active as cephalothin in vitro in a serum assay. The half life in serum of cefazolin, cephalothin, and methicillin were each about 30 min. Serum bactericidal activities of the three antibiotics were very similar.
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Bryant R. E., Alford R. H. Unsuccessful treatment of staphylococcal endocarditis with cefazolin. JAMA. 1977 Feb 7;237(6):569–570. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Carrizosa J., Kaye D. Antibiotic synergism in enterococcal endocarditis. J Lab Clin Med. 1976 Jul;88(1):132–141. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Durack D. T., Petersdorf R. G. Chemotherapy of experimental streptococcal endocarditis. I. Comparison of commonly recommended prophylactic regimens. J Clin Invest. 1973 Mar;52(3):592–598. doi: 10.1172/JCI107220. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Kunin C. M. A guide to use of antibiotics in patients with renal disease. A table of recommended doses and factors governing serum levels. Ann Intern Med. 1967 Jul;67(1):151–158. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-67-1-151. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Levison M. E., Levison S. P., Ries K., Kaye D. Pharmacology of cefazolin in patients with normal and abnormal renal function. J Infect Dis. 1973 Oct;128(Suppl):S354–S357. doi: 10.1093/infdis/128.supplement_2.s354. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Regamey C., Libke R. D., Engelking E. R., Clarke J. T., Kirby M. M. Inactivation of cefazolin, cephaloridine, and cephalothin by methicillin-sensitive and methicillin-resistant strains of Staphylococcus aureus. J Infect Dis. 1975 Mar;131(3):291–294. doi: 10.1093/infdis/131.3.291. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- WICK W. E., BONIECE W. S. IN VITRO AND IN VIVO LABORATORY EVALUATION OF CEPHALOGLYCIN AND CEPHALORIDINE. Appl Microbiol. 1965 Mar;13:248–253. doi: 10.1128/am.13.2.248-253.1965. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]