中国抗生素杂志
中國抗生素雜誌
중국항생소잡지
CHINESE JOURNAL OF ANTIBIOTICS
2005年
5期
289-294
,共6页
匡湘红%周黎明%王浴生%杨芳炬%张淑华%欧真容
劻湘紅%週黎明%王浴生%楊芳炬%張淑華%歐真容
광상홍%주려명%왕욕생%양방거%장숙화%구진용
司帕沙星%妥舒沙星%MIC50%MIC90%ED50
司帕沙星%妥舒沙星%MIC50%MIC90%ED50
사파사성%타서사성%MIC50%MIC90%ED50
Sparfloxacin%Tosufloxacin%MIC50%MIC90%ED50
目的观察国产司帕沙星、妥舒沙星及其它四种氟喹诺酮类抗菌药对成都地区780株临床分离菌的体外抗菌活性,并比较司帕沙星、妥舒沙星和环丙沙星对金葡球菌、大肠埃希菌和铜绿假单胞菌感染小鼠的体内抗菌活性.方法用琼脂稀释法测定国产司帕沙星和妥舒沙星的MIC50和MIC 90,并与其它四种氟喹诺酮类抗菌药进行了比较.本文还测定了抗菌药对金葡球菌、大肠埃希菌和铜绿假单胞菌感染小鼠治疗的ED50.结果体外试验表明司帕沙星和妥舒沙星能有效抑制或杀灭革兰阳性、革兰阴性菌及厌氧菌,显示了广谱抗菌活性.司帕沙星和妥舒沙星对革兰阳性菌的抗菌活性是环丙沙星的2～8倍,氧氟沙星和氟罗沙星的4～1 6倍,是诺氟沙星的16～32倍.司帕沙星对MRSA的抗菌活性与妥舒沙星相似,但优于环丙沙星、氧氟沙星、氟罗沙星和诺氟沙星.司帕沙星对大多数革兰阴性菌的抗菌活性与环丙沙星和妥舒沙星相似,是氧氟沙星、氟罗沙星和诺氟沙星的2～8倍.两药对厌氧菌的抗菌活性也较环丙沙星强.口服或皮下注射司帕沙星对金葡球菌和大肠埃希菌所致小鼠全身性感染的保护作用优于环丙沙星和妥舒沙星.同一给药途径下司帕沙星对铜绿假单胞菌所致小鼠全身性感染的保护作用与妥舒沙星和环丙沙星相似.三种受试药对金葡球菌和大肠埃希菌所致小鼠全身性感染的保护作用优于铜绿假单胞菌所致感染.结论司帕沙星和妥舒沙星对革兰阳性菌和厌氧菌的体外抗菌活性优于环丙沙星和其它药物,对大多数革兰阴性菌的抗菌活性与环丙沙星相似,但优于其它受试药.司帕沙星对金葡球菌和大肠埃希菌所致小鼠全身性感染的体内保护作用优于环丙沙星和妥舒沙星.同一给药途径下司帕沙星对铜绿假单胞菌所致小鼠全身性感染的保护作用与妥舒沙星和环丙沙星相似.
目的觀察國產司帕沙星、妥舒沙星及其它四種氟喹諾酮類抗菌藥對成都地區780株臨床分離菌的體外抗菌活性,併比較司帕沙星、妥舒沙星和環丙沙星對金葡毬菌、大腸埃希菌和銅綠假單胞菌感染小鼠的體內抗菌活性.方法用瓊脂稀釋法測定國產司帕沙星和妥舒沙星的MIC50和MIC 90,併與其它四種氟喹諾酮類抗菌藥進行瞭比較.本文還測定瞭抗菌藥對金葡毬菌、大腸埃希菌和銅綠假單胞菌感染小鼠治療的ED50.結果體外試驗錶明司帕沙星和妥舒沙星能有效抑製或殺滅革蘭暘性、革蘭陰性菌及厭氧菌,顯示瞭廣譜抗菌活性.司帕沙星和妥舒沙星對革蘭暘性菌的抗菌活性是環丙沙星的2～8倍,氧氟沙星和氟囉沙星的4～1 6倍,是諾氟沙星的16～32倍.司帕沙星對MRSA的抗菌活性與妥舒沙星相似,但優于環丙沙星、氧氟沙星、氟囉沙星和諾氟沙星.司帕沙星對大多數革蘭陰性菌的抗菌活性與環丙沙星和妥舒沙星相似,是氧氟沙星、氟囉沙星和諾氟沙星的2～8倍.兩藥對厭氧菌的抗菌活性也較環丙沙星彊.口服或皮下註射司帕沙星對金葡毬菌和大腸埃希菌所緻小鼠全身性感染的保護作用優于環丙沙星和妥舒沙星.同一給藥途徑下司帕沙星對銅綠假單胞菌所緻小鼠全身性感染的保護作用與妥舒沙星和環丙沙星相似.三種受試藥對金葡毬菌和大腸埃希菌所緻小鼠全身性感染的保護作用優于銅綠假單胞菌所緻感染.結論司帕沙星和妥舒沙星對革蘭暘性菌和厭氧菌的體外抗菌活性優于環丙沙星和其它藥物,對大多數革蘭陰性菌的抗菌活性與環丙沙星相似,但優于其它受試藥.司帕沙星對金葡毬菌和大腸埃希菌所緻小鼠全身性感染的體內保護作用優于環丙沙星和妥舒沙星.同一給藥途徑下司帕沙星對銅綠假單胞菌所緻小鼠全身性感染的保護作用與妥舒沙星和環丙沙星相似.
목적관찰국산사파사성、타서사성급기타사충불규낙동류항균약대성도지구780주림상분리균적체외항균활성,병비교사파사성、타서사성화배병사성대금포구균、대장애희균화동록가단포균감염소서적체내항균활성.방법용경지희석법측정국산사파사성화타서사성적MIC50화MIC 90,병여기타사충불규낙동류항균약진행료비교.본문환측정료항균약대금포구균、대장애희균화동록가단포균감염소서치료적ED50.결과체외시험표명사파사성화타서사성능유효억제혹살멸혁란양성、혁란음성균급염양균,현시료엄보항균활성.사파사성화타서사성대혁란양성균적항균활성시배병사성적2～8배,양불사성화불라사성적4～1 6배,시낙불사성적16～32배.사파사성대MRSA적항균활성여타서사성상사,단우우배병사성、양불사성、불라사성화낙불사성.사파사성대대다수혁란음성균적항균활성여배병사성화타서사성상사,시양불사성、불라사성화낙불사성적2～8배.량약대염양균적항균활성야교배병사성강.구복혹피하주사사파사성대금포구균화대장애희균소치소서전신성감염적보호작용우우배병사성화타서사성.동일급약도경하사파사성대동록가단포균소치소서전신성감염적보호작용여타서사성화배병사성상사.삼충수시약대금포구균화대장애희균소치소서전신성감염적보호작용우우동록가단포균소치감염.결론사파사성화타서사성대혁란양성균화염양균적체외항균활성우우배병사성화기타약물,대대다수혁란음성균적항균활성여배병사성상사,단우우기타수시약.사파사성대금포구균화대장애희균소치소서전신성감염적체내보호작용우우배병사성화타서사성.동일급약도경하사파사성대동록가단포균소치소서전신성감염적보호작용여타서사성화배병사성상사.
Objective To investigate the in vitro and in vivo antibacterial activities of domestic sparfloxacin (SPFX), tosufloxacin (TFLX). Methods The minimal inhibitory concentrations (MIC50 and MIC90) of SPFX and TFLX against 780 clinical isolates were detected by agar dilution method and compared with those of four other fluoroquinolones. ED50 were also measured in mice systemically infected with S. aureus, P. aeruginosa and E. coli. Results Results showed that both domestic SPFX and TFLX were broad-spectrum antibacterial agents since they inhibited or killed Gram-positive, Gram-negative and anaerobic clinical isolates effectively. The antibacterial activities of SPFX and TFLX against Gram-positive microorganisms were about 2～8 fold stronger than that of ciprofloxacin (CPFX), 4～16 fold stronger than that of flerofloxacin (FLRX) and ofloxacin (OFLX), and 16～32 fold more potent than that of norfloxacin (NFLX). SPFX had a similar activity against methicillin- resistant S. aureus (MRSA) to TFLX, but better activities than those of CPFX, FLRX, OFLX and NFLX. The antibacterial activity of SPFX against the majority of the Gram-negative clinical isolates was similar to those of TFLX and CPFX, and was about 2～8 fold more potent than those of OFLX, FLRX and NFLX. SPFX and TFLX also showed better activity against anaerobic isolates than that of CPFX.The protective effects of SPFX in systemic infections of mice caused by S. aureus, E. coli are better than those of TFLX and CPFX when administered orally or subcutaneously. In systemically infected mice causded by P. aeruginosa, the protective effect of SPFX was similar to TFLX and CPFX when administered with the same route. SPFX, TFLX and CPFX showed better protective effect on S. aureus and E. coli infected mice than that of P. aeruginosa. Conclusion Domestic SPFX and TFLX showed more potent in vitro activities against Gram-positive and anaerobic isolates than those of CPFX and other fluoroquinolones. Against majority of the Gram-negative isolates, their activities were similar to those of CPFX, but better than other tested fluoroquinolones. The protective effects of SPFX on S. aureus and E. coli infected mice were superior to those of TFLX and CPFX. When administered with the same route, the protective effect of SPFX on systemic infection mice caused by P. aeruginosa was similar to TFLX and CPFX.
