Skip to main content
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy logoLink to Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
. 1974 Jan;5(1):63–67. doi: 10.1128/aac.5.1.63

Disk Susceptibility Studies with Cefazolin and Cephalothin

Paul Actor 1, Joseph Guarini 1, Joseph Uri 1, Judith Dickson 1, John F Pauls 1, Jerry A Weisbach 1
PMCID: PMC428919  PMID: 4840450

Abstract

Cefazolin and cephalothin disk susceptibility and minimal inhibitory concentration determinations were conducted on 591 clinical isolates. Cefazolin demonstrated superior activity, as shown by lower minimal inhibitory concentrations, and a greater percentage of isolates inhibited in the disk susceptibility test. The cephalothin antibiotic class disk by the standard Bauer-Kirby method failed to detect susceptibility to cefazolin in a significant percentage of Escherchia coli, Enterobacter species, and Enterococcus isolates. A separate cefazolin disk with a susceptibility cut-off point of 18 mm is recommended. An alternative to a separate cefazolin disk would be a reinterpretation of the cephalothin susceptibility disk zone diameters so that it would more adequately predict cefazolin activity.

Full text

PDF
63

Selected References

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

  1. Bauer A. W., Kirby W. M., Sherris J. C., Turck M. Antibiotic susceptibility testing by a standardized single disk method. Am J Clin Pathol. 1966 Apr;45(4):493–496. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Isenberg H. D., Painter B. G., Sampson-Scherer J., Siegel M. Clinical laboratory study of cephacetrile and cephalothin against bacteria recently isolated from clinical specimens. Am J Clin Pathol. 1973 May;59(5):700–705. doi: 10.1093/ajcp/59.5.700. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Matsen J. M., Koepcke M. J., Quie P. G. Evaluation of the Bauer-Kirby-Sherris-Turck single-disc diffusion method of antibiotic susceptibility testing. Antimicrob Agents Chemother (Bethesda) 1969;9:445–453. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Nishida M., Matsubara T., Murakawa T., Mine Y., Yokota Y., Kuwahara S., Goto S. In vitro and in vivo evaluation of cefazolin, a new cephalosporin C derivative. Antimicrob Agents Chemother (Bethesda) 1969;9:236–243. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Reller L. B., Karney W. W., Beaty H. N., Holmes K. K., Turck M. Evaluation of cefazolin, a new cephalosporin antibiotic. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1973 Apr;3(4):488–497. doi: 10.1128/aac.3.4.488. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Ries K., Levison M. E., Kaye D. Clinical and in vitro evaluation of cefazolin, a new cephalosporin antibiotic. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1973 Feb;3(2):168–174. doi: 10.1128/aac.3.2.168. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Seiga K., Yamaji K., Miyoshi K., Minagawa M. Laboratory and clinical studies on cefazolin, a new derivative of semisynthetic cephalosporin. Int J Clin Pharmacol. 1972 Jun;6(2):135–142. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Shibata K., Fujii M. Clinical studies of cefazolin in the surgical field. Antimicrob Agents Chemother (Bethesda) 1970;10:467–472. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Wick W. E., Preston D. A. Biological properties of three 3-heterocyclic-thiomethyl cephalosporin antibiotics. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1972 Mar;1(3):221–234. doi: 10.1128/aac.1.3.221. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

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

RESOURCES