to investigate the synergistic potential of four cephalosporins in combination with polymyxin B (PMB). A checkerboard assay was performed to evaluate the synergistic effects of cephalexin (CLX), cefixime, cefotaxime (CTX), and cefmenoxime (CMX) in combination with PMB. Subsequently, experiments evaluating the use of CTX or CMX in combination with PMB (CTX-PMB or CMX-PMB, respectively), including growth curve
Neurobehavioral Effects of Cephalosporins: Assessment of Locomotors Activity, Motor and Sensory Development in Zebrafish Most third- and fourth-generation cephalosporins, such as cefotaxime, cefmenoxime, cefepime, and cefpirome, contain an aminothiazoyl ring at the C-7 position. Drug impurity, which may be produced either during synthesis or upon degradation, can induce adverse effects. Various
examination showed gram-positive cocci but no fungi. The patient was diagnosed with a corneal perforation and bacterial keratitis. Levofloxacin 1.5% and cefmenoxime treatments were initiated and a soft contact lens was placed to seal the wound. On day 3, there was no improvement in the corneal cell infiltration, but AS-OCT suggested that the inner wound had closed. A culture test revealed the presence of , which was sensitive to both levofloxacin and cefmenoxime. Therefore, we continued the same antibiotic treatment. On day 26, the opacification and cell infiltration at the center of the cornea had improved. AS-OCT showed healing of the corneal wound with reduction in the central corneal thickness. Her BCVA improved to 1.0. AS-OCT was a valuable tool to noninvasively observe wound shape and detect
receiving continuous monotherapy with prostaglandin analogs for glaucoma for at least 1 year. Minimum inhibitory concentrations of levofloxacin, gatifloxacin, moxifloxacin, cefmenoxime, tobramycin, chloramphenicol, and erythromycin against the isolates were measured to determine susceptibility. The positive culture rate in all cases was 90.5% (57/63 eyes), and a total of 79 bacterial strains were isolated
in corneal stroma. Penetrating keratoplasty was performed on her left eye. She was treated with topical applications of 1.5% levofloxacin, 0.5% cefmenoxime, 0.1% betamethasone, 0.1% hyaluronate sodium, and 3% aciclovir after penetrating keratoplasty. Delayed epithelialization of the donor graft was observed at day 4 post-transplantation. Because of the concern that levofloxacin induced corneal
. Multiple anti-fungal therapies with levofloxacin ophthalmic solution were administered. Although empiric treatment was initially effective, keratitis recurred 10 days after its initiation. Repeated corneal scraping revealed an abundance of Gram-positive chain cocci and a small amount of fungi, resulting in the switching of an antibiotic medication from levofloxacin to moxifloxacin and cefmenoxime
strain from the patient. The obtained DNA sequence showed 99% homology with The combination of corneal scraping and instillation of cefmenoxime antibiotic ophthalmic solution was considered useful for the treatment of keratitis. Clinicians should be aware of keratitis as a corneal complication of AKC, and that rapid diagnosis of keratitis may improve visual prognosis.
Comparative efficacy of cefmenoxime versus penicillin in the treatment of gonorrhea. A total of 121 men with complicated infections caused by beta-lactamase-negative Neisseria gonorrhoeae were included in this study. They were randomly assigned to regimens of either cefmenoxime (1.0 g) or procaine penicillin G (4.8 X 10(6) U) intramuscularly. Only the penicillin group also took 1.0 g of probenecid orally. A total of 99 patients completed the study, providing data from 108 infected sites. In the cefmenoxime group, there were 49 urethral, 1 rectal, and 2 pharyngeal infections; in the penicillin group, there were 49 urethral, 4 rectal, and 3 pharyngeal infections. In the cefmenoxime group, all except one urethral infection were eradicated. This patient admitted having had sexual intercourse
Cefmenoxime versus cefoxitin in the treatment of serious bacterial infections. A comparative study was conducted using cefmenoxime, a new extended spectrum cephalosporin, versus cefoxitin. Entry into the study was based on a computer-generated randomization (two cefmenoxime to one cefoxitin). An intravenous dose of cefmenoxime (0.5 to 1 g every six hours) or cefoxitin (1 to 2 g every six hours ) was administered to patients suspected of having serious bacterial infections. Six patients had urinary tract infections. Four who received cefmenoxime, including two with positive blood cultures, had eradication of bacteremia. One of the two who received cefoxitin had significant bacteriuria, and the urine was clear after treatment. Twenty-four patients were treated for lower respiratory tract infections. All
Comparative evaluation of cefmenoxime versus cefoxitin in serious infections. Fifty-nine patients with serious infections were assigned at random in a two-to-one ratio to receive either cefmenoxime or cefoxitin given intravenously in a dosage of 0.5 to 2.0 g every six hours. Of 44 patients evaluable for efficacy, eight had concomitant bacteremia and all but 10 had serious underlying disease . The average duration of therapy was seven days. All patients with skin and soft tissue infections were cured after treatment with either antibiotic. Cefmenoxime achieved clinical and bacteriologic cures in 92 and 83 percent, respectively, of 12 patients with pneumonia and in 100 and 82 percent of 11 patients with urinary tract infections. Cefoxitin therapy resulted in clinical and bacteriologic cures in all
[Identification and antibiotic prophylaxis of high-risk patients in biliary tract surgery]. A prospective randomized trial has compared 3 policies of antibiotic prophylaxis in biliary surgery. Patients considered to be high-risked against postoperative infection were randomly allocated to 2 groups: in group CTM-H, patients were given cefotiam; in group CMX-H, patients were given cefmenoxime
[Cefmenoxime or piperacillin plus amikacin. A prospective randomized comparison of empiric antibiotic therapy of febrile granulocytopenic cancer patients]. Cefmenoxime plus amikacin was compared in a prospective randomized trial with our standard regimen of piperacillin plus amikacin as an empiric therapy for fever in patients with granulocytopenia. Initial profound granulocytopenia (fewer than 100/mm3 mature granulocytes) was present in approximately 45% of the patients in trial of both treatment groups. Of 53 microbiologically and clinically documented infections treated with piperacillin plus amikacin, 36 (68%) showed improvement. Of 48 microbiologically and clinically documented infections treated with cefmenoxime plus amikacin, 23 (48%) showed improvement. The response rate for gram
), fradiomycin (FRM), cefmenoxime (CMX) and cephalexin (CEX), were determined up to a concentration of 800 micrograms/ml with inoculum sizes of 10(6) and 10(8) CFU/ml. About 30% of S. aureus was multi-drug resistant, including methicillin and cephems, but FOM showed excellent antibacterial activity against it. The FOM had superior antibacterial activity against P. aeruginosa to CP, FRM and CMX, and was also
[The effect of preoperative topical antibiotics in cataract surgery]. We studied whether topical antibiotics prevent endophthalmitis after cataract surgery. Cefmenoxime hydrochloride (CMX) or artificial tears (AT) were randomly instilled 72 hours before surgery. Conjunctival swab samples were taken before the instillation of eye drops (1) and after the instillation of eye drops (2). Aqueous
Modeling the response of pneumonia to antimicrobial therapy. The response to antimicrobial therapy in patients with pneumonia was assessed by using a previously developed pneumonia scoring system. Patients from two different clinical trials were evaluated. The first group (n = 22) was treated with cefmenoxime. For these patients, doses were adjusted to achieve an area under the plasma , and significance was accepted at P < 0.05. There were no differences in baseline scores at day one for the patients treated with different antibiotics (P = 0.58). For patients with pathogen eradication, a significant difference between the two studies in time to eradication was found: 4.8 days for cefmenoxime-treated patients and 1.4 days for CIP- or TAZ-treated patients (P < 0.001). For patients experiencing