Search PubMedSearch

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Cefoperazone”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

[Study of cefoperazone in the field of obstetrics and gynecology. Susceptibility of clinical isolates to cefoperazone and cefoperazone concentrations in the exudate of the pelvic dead space].

As indexes for administration of cefoperazone (CPZ) in the treatment of gyneco-obstetrical infections, sensitivities to CPZ of important pathogenic organisms and CPZ concentrations in the exudate of the pelvic dead space were determined, and a pharmacokinetic analysis was made on the results. Sensitivities to CPZ were determined for freshly isolated organisms from gynecological material consisting of 227 strains of 7 aerobic bacteria and 70 strains of 1 anaerobic bacterium, in a total of 297 strains. MIC80 values of CPZ against E. coli, K. pneumoniae, P. aeruginosa, E. cloacae, C. freundii, S. aureus, S. epidermidis and B. fragilis were 0.39, 0.78, 6.25, 25, 50, 12.5, 12.5 micrograms/ml and 6.25 micrograms/ml, respectively. On the whole, these activities are relatively superior to those of other antibiotics. CPZ concentrations in the exudate of the pelvic dead space and their changes with time after 2 g single dose by drip infusion were Cmax 93.89 micrograms/ml, Tmax 1.53 hours, T 1/2 4.33 hours and AUC 759.4 hr X micrograms/ml. After 1 g single dose, they were Cmax 37.7 micrograms/ml, Tmax 3.2 hours, T 1/2 2.78 hours and AUC 339.2 hr X micrograms/ml. Similarly, after 2 g single dose intravenously, they were Cmax 111.02 micrograms/ml, Tmax 0.761 hours, T 1/2 6.22 hours and AUC 1,083.9 hr X micrograms/ml, and after 1 g single dose, they were Cmax 29.1 micrograms/ml, Tmax 2.65 hours, T 1/2 4.82 hours and AUC 296.9 hr X micrograms/ml. Similarly, after 2 g single dose intramuscularly, they were 39.4 micrograms/ml, Tmax 2.70 hours, T 1/2 8.19 hours and AUC 584.7 hr X micrograms/ml, and after 1 g single dose, they were Cmax 26.4 micrograms/ml, Tmax 5.79 hours, T 1/2 5.53 hours and AUC 435.7 hr X micrograms/ml. As indicated, there were noted dose-dependent responses and the kinetics of CPZ exudate concentrations varied with the administration routes. Whatever the dose level and the administration route were, CPZ exudate concentrations covered MIC80 values against important clinical isolates for 10 to 12 hours. This suggests that we can well expect of the antibacterial activity of this drug by any of these administration routes and dosages on the intrapelvic lesions.

Bacteria

Antibacterial activity of cefoperazone and cefoperazone plus sulbactam in a neutropenic site model.

Efficacy of cefoperazone versus cefoperazone plus sulbactam was studied in a rabbit neutropenic site infection model against a broad range of clinical isolates including six isolates each of staphylococci, enterococci, pneumococci, Enterobacteriaceae, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Therapy of cefoperazone plus sulbactam demonstrated enhanced efficacy against the staphylococci, pseudomonads, and Enterobacteriaceae. The activity of cefoperazone against enterococci and pneumococci was not enhanced or inhibited by the addition of sulbactam. Increased concentrations of cefoperazone found at the infection sites when sulbactam was added to the therapeutic regimen indicates that sulbactam provided a protection to cefoperazone from beta-lactamases produced by staphylococci and Enterobacteriaceae. The combination improved the efficacy of cefoperazone in this animal model.

Animals

Therapy with cefoperazone plus sulbactam against disseminated infection due to cefoperazone-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Escherichia coli in granulocytopenic mice.

Using a granulocytopenic murine model, we evaluated the efficacy of cefoperazone plus sulbactam against disseminated infection due to isolates of beta-lactamase-producing, cefoperazone-resistant (MIC, > or = 50 micrograms/ml) Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Both isolates were susceptible in vitro to cefoperazone plus sulbactam (MIC, < or = 6.3 micrograms/ml). Mice rendered granulocytopenic with cyclophosphamide were divided into three groups: group A--infected, untreated mice (controls); group B--infected, cefoperazone-treated mice (700 mg/kg of body weight); and group C--infected, cefoperazone-plus-sulbactam-treated mice (700 mg plus 350 mg). In the E. coli experiment, survival rates in groups A, B, and C were 25, 46, and 73%, respectively. In the experiment with P. aeruginosa, survival rates in groups A, B, and C were 0, 10, and 50%, respectively (P < 0.001). Highly significant differences also were noted for colony counts in the blood, liver, and spleen of group C mice versus group A or B mice in both experiments. Thus, cefoperazone plus sulbactam appears to be a promising combination for the treatment of infections due to certain cefoperazone-resistant gram-negative bacilli, including P. aeruginosa.

Agranulocytosis

Error rates in cefoperazone and cefoperazone-sulbactam disk tests with Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

In a collaborative study involving five medical centers, 6% of 2,440 consecutive isolates of Enterobacteriaceae were resistant to cefoperazone; resistance to cefoperazone was reduced to < 1% by the addition of sulbactam. Susceptibility to cefoperazone and cefoperazone-sulbactam was accurately predicted by disk diffusion tests. Resistance to cefoperazone, however, was not as reliably detected by disk tests and results of dilution tests were not always consistent. The prevalence of resistance to cefoperazone and/or the ability to detect resistance had a significant influence on very major error rates for individual laboratories.

Agar

Multicentered study of cefoperazone for treatment of intraabdominal infections and comparison of cefoperazone with cefamandole and clindamycin plus gentamicin for treatment of appendicitis and peritonitis.

Cefoperazone was evaluated for efficacy and safety in the treatment of known or suspected intraabdominal infections. Initially, 59 patients were enrolled in an open, noncomparative study. Of the 35 patients in whom the efficacy of treatment could be evaluated, 32 had a satisfactory clinical response. In this open study, cefoperazone eradicated 62 of 71 pathogens. The safety of the drug was evaluated in all 59 patients. Adverse reactions were seen in nine patients. In the second part of the study, 144 patients were enrolled. Fifty-seven of these patients received cefoperazone, 35 received cefamandole, and 52 received clindamycin plus gentamicin. Therapeutic efficacy could be evaluated in 20 patients who received cefoperazone, 20 who received cefamandole, and 16 who received clindamycin-gentamicin. Satisfactory clinical responses were seen in 90%, 80%, and 100% of these patients, respectively; satisfactory bacteriologic responses were seen in 100%, 95%, and 100%, respectively. A 5% incidence of adverse reactions was observed among the 57 patients who received cefoperazone; in contrast, the rate of adverse reaction to cefamandole was 11%, and that to clindamycin-gentamicin was 11.5%. No differences were seen among the patients in the three groups. Thus, cefoperazone appears to be safe and effective for the treatment of intraabdominal infections of bacterial etiology.

Abdomen

In-vitro activity of cefoperazone-sulbactam combination against cefoperazone resistant clinical isolates in a Malaysian general hospital.

Beta-lactamase production is one of the major mechanisms of resistance amongst bacteria especially the enteric bacilli. The purpose of this study is to assess the in-vitro activity of Sulperazon, a combination of cefoperazone and an irreversible beta-lactamase inhibitor, sulbactam, against the cefoperazone resistant isolates of aerobic gram-negative bacilli. A total of 92 such strains were tested. It was found that at a concentration of < or = 8 mg/l of sulbactam added to cefoperazone 82% of Klebsiella spp, 100% of E. coli, 100% of Enterobacter spp, 33% of Pseudomonas aeruginosa, 67% of Pseudomonas spp and 62% of Acinetobacter spp that were resistant to cefoperazone alone were susceptible to the combination. Hence it is concluded that the addition of sulbactam to cefoperazone does expand the spectrum of the in-vitro activity of cefoperazone.

Cefoperazone

In-vitro susceptibility of cefoperazone-susceptible and -resistant gram-negative rods to cefoperazone plus sulbactam, other beta-lactams, aminoglycosides and quinolone.

We compared the in-vitro activity of cefoperazone-sulbactam (2:1), other beta-lactams, amino-glycosides and ciprofloxacin against cefoperazone-susceptible and -resistant nosocomial gram-negative bacilli. Resistant isolates including Pseudomonas aeruginosa were susceptible to cefoperazone-sulbactam; the susceptible isolates had modestly increased susceptibility to the combination. Sulbactam, by itself, was poorly active. Among others tested, ciprofloxacin and imipenem were the most active. No inoculum effect was seen with cefoperazone-sulbactam and this drug combination had a prolonged post-antibiotic effect. Cefoperazone-sulbactam is an attractive candidate for evaluation in the treatment of nosocomial infections due to aerobic gram-negative bacilli.

4-Quinolones

In vitro activities of cefoperazone and sulbactam singly and in combination against cefoperazone-resistant members of the family Enterobacteriaceae and nonfermenters.

Among 28,000 isolates of the family Enterobacteriaceae and nonfermenters isolated at multiple medical centers, 1,084 (4%) were resistant to cefoperazone (MIC, greater than or equal to 64 micrograms/ml) and 1,711 (6%) exhibited cefoperazone MICs of 2 to 32 micrograms/ml. Ninety-six percent of these 2,795 isolates produced beta-lactamase, as determined by the nitrocefin test. Sulbactam alone (8 micrograms/ml) was inactive against 99.6% of the isolates other than Acinetobacter calcoaceticus and Pseudomonas cepacia. Sulbactam enhanced the activity of cefoperazone against 56% of the isolates of the family Enterobacteriaceae and 44% of the nonfermenters. In the presence of sulbactam concentrations of less than or equal to 8 micrograms/ml, 65% of the cefoperazone-resistant isolates had reductions in cefoperazone MICs of greater than or equal to 2 log2 dilution steps and were susceptible to less than or equal to 32 micrograms/ml. Antagonism was not observed.

Bacteria

Comparison of the productivity of cefoperazone amphotericin teicoplanin (CAT) agar and modified charcoal cefoperazone deoxycholate (mCCD) agar for various strains of Campylobacter, Arcobacter and Helicobacter pullorum.

Cefoperazone amphotericin teicoplanin (CAT) agar was developed from cefoperazone deoxycholate (mCCD) agar by modification of the selective antibiotics in order to permit growth of strains of Campylobacter upsaliensis. In this study, 35 strains of Campylobacter and Arcobacter were tested for their ability to grow on CAT and mCCD media using the ecometric method. Six of these strains were also tested using the modified Miles-Misra method. Overall, nineteen strains out of the 35 tested grew better on CAT than on mCCD agar, although for eight strains, the difference was slight. These differences could not be attributed solely to poorer growth of C. upsaliensis on mCCD agar. No strain grew better on mCCD than CAT agar. Eight of the 35 strains tested did not grow on mCCD agar at all, however, only one strain failed to grow on CAT medium. The two methods of testing gave similar results, although the Miles-Misra method was found to be more sensitive and less prone to subjective interpretation. All four CNUPC (catalase negative, urease positive campylobacter-like) strains, one strain of C. sputorum biovar, fecalis, one of two Arcobacter cryaerophilus strains (incubated at 30 degrees C, aerobically) could be detected only using CAT agar. In addition, for some strains of A. butzleri, C. upsaliensis and C. hyointestinalis, CAT medium gave better growth scores than mCCD agar. The level of cefoperazone in mCCDA is inhibitory to some campylobacter strains, but suboptimal growth of Arcobacter strains is more probably due to synergistic interaction between deoxycholate and cefoperazone. CAT agar supports the growth of a wider variety of Campylobacter and Arcobacter species than mCCD agar.

Agar

Comparative efficacy of cefoperazone, cefoperazone plus sulbactam, ciprofloxacin, clindamycin, metronidazole, and penicillin G against anaerobic bacteria in an animal model.

Treatment efficacy of various antimicrobial regimens against anaerobes was studied in semipermeable chambers simulating a closed-space, locally neutropenic infection site in rabbits. Bacteroides fragilis, Bacteroides melaninogenicus, Clostridium perfringens, and Peptostreptococcus anaerobius were inoculated (at a mean of 5.3 log10 CFU/ml in prereduced pooled rabbit serum) into the chambers (one isolate per chamber) in triplicate. Antimicrobial therapy consisted of cefoperazone, cefoperazone plus sulbactam, ciprofloxacin, clindamycin, metronidazole (against the gram-negative anaerobes), or penicillin G (against the gram-positive anaerobes), beginning 4 hours after organism inoculation and continuing every 6 hours for 16 doses. With the use of anaerobic techniques for specimen acquisition, transport, and culture, quantitative bacterial findings were measured at the start of therapy and at various time points thereafter. Antibiotic concentrations were measured in blood and chamber fluid by liquid chromatography or bioassay methods. At the end of the study in vivo organisms were reduced by at least 3 log10 CFU/ml from drug-free growth control chambers by all the antimicrobial regimens tested except for cefoperazone against B. fragilis and ciprofloxacin against the three isolates tested. The addition of sulbactam to cefoperazone inhibited B. fragilis beta-lactamase activity and eradicated B. fragilis in vivo. In vivo results with this model confirmed in vitro susceptibilities of all tested antimicrobials except ciprofloxacin and should provide useful indications of the potential clinical efficacy of other new agents against anaerobes.

Animals

In vitro activity of cefoperazone-sulbactam combinations against cefoperazone-resistant clinical bacterial isolates.

From July 1987 to January 1988, 452 cefoperazone-resistant bacterial isolates were identified among strains subjected to routine susceptibility testing in a clinical microbiology laboratory. The 452 isolates were tested for susceptibility to cefoperazone, sulbactam, and a 2:1 combination of these drugs by agar dilution techniques. The greatest benefit of the cefoperazone-sulbactam combination was noted against Bacteroides spp. and Acinetobacter spp. The combination demonstrated clinically significant synergism against approximately 20% of strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Acinetobacter

Antimicrobial activity and other in vitro properties of cefoperazone A, the principal metabolite of cefoperazone sodium.

Cefoperazone A, the principal metabolite of cefoperazone, was found to have an antimicrobial activity ranging from slightly below to 16-fold less than that of the parent drug. Like cefoperazone, the metabolite is bactericidal, penetrates well into bacterial cells, and has moderate beta-lactamase stability, some strains of members of the family Enterobacteriaceae produce an inoculum effect on the metabolite activity.

Bacteria

Cefoperazone and cefoperazone-sulbactam susceptibility tests with anaerobic bacteria by the thioglycolate disk elution method.

Tests were performed with 104 anaerobic microorganisms to evaluate the thioglycolate disk elution technique for the detection of resistance to cefoperazone and cefoperazone-sulbactam. An unacceptably high false-resistance rate and a poor reproducibility record make the disk elution procedure unsatisfactory for routine testing of this drug or combination of drugs.

Bacteria, Anaerobic

Pharmacokinetic study on adenomatous prostate tissue concentrations of cefoperazone. Clinical efficacy and patient tolerance of intramuscular cefoperazone treatment of chronic bacterial prostatitis.

Cephalosporins do not reach active therapeutical concentrations in the prostatic tissue in patients suffering from chronic bacterial prostatitis. Cefoperazone is an exception. Its efficacy in the treatment of chronic bacterial prostatitis in 20 patients was studied and the concentrations, obtained after intramuscular administration, evaluated in patients who underwent transurethral operation due to prostatic hypertrophy (in 14 patients). The cefoperazone concentrations in the prostate have been evaluated 60, 90 and in some cases 120 min after the administration of the drug and compared to those obtained in serum. The clinical cure has been obtained in 16 patients. The average drug concentration in the prostate after 60 min was 22.8 +/- 13.6 versus 39.8 +/- 20.0 micrograms/ml in serum; 90 min after administration the average concentration in the prostate was 23.2 +/- 14.1 versus 35.7 +/- 18.1 micrograms/ml in serum. The correlation was significant both at 60 min (r = 64, p less than 0.05) and at 90 min (r = 64, p less than 0.05).

Cefoperazone

Comparison of the activity of cefoperazone, cefuroxime and cefoxitin against Gram-negative bacilli and synergy studies with cefoperazone and ticarcillin.

83% of at least 11 different species of Gram-negative aerobic bacilli, comprising 270 clinical isolates, were inhibited by 3.1 microgram cefoperazone per ml. 55% and 48% were inhibited by 3.1 micrograms/ml of cefuroxime and cefoxitin, respectively. In addition, cefoperazone inhibited 83 of 96 Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates at a concentration of 6.2 microgram/ml. Cefoperazone/ticarcillin combinations were shown to be synergistic for 47/96 (49%) of Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates studied, when lowering of the minimum bactericidal concentrations of the 2 drugs was the criterion for enhancement of activity. Cefoperazone/ticarcillin combinations were also shown to be synergistic against 15/30 Serratia marcescens isolates. We discuss the possible advantages of synergistic combinations of drugs of relatively low toxicity, for the management of complicated infections.

Anti-Bacterial Agents

[Kinetics of cefoperazone and cefoperazone and cephalothin in rat tissues].

In order to study the behavior of two cephalosporines in various tissues, 100 mg/kg of cefoperazone (CPZ) or cefalotine (CLT) were administered intraperitoneally to Wistar rats. The animals were sacrificed by groups of 6 at intervals ranging from 30 min to 6 hours after the injection and bioassay of the antibiotic was carried out in 9 organs, the serum, and urine. There are marked differences in tissue affinity for each antibiotic, as well as between the tow antibiotics. With the exception of the renal medulla, CPZ penetrates most tissues better than CLT. This difference is particularly striking in the liver. The decline of concentrations is nearly the same in tissues and serum; it is 2--3 times slower for CPZ. Concentration of CPZ exceed 1 microgram/g for more than 6 hours in the kidney and 4 hours in the liver, whereas CLT cannot be quantified after 2 hours in the kidney and after 1 hour in the liver. As has been noted for other antibiotics, plasma protein binding has only limited influence on cephalosporin penetration into tissues. This study of pharmacokinetics in tissues shows that CPZ permeates well those tissues where it is supposed to be effective and remains there longer than CLT. The study illustrates a method which provides a better understanding of the mechanisms responsible for antibiotic action.

Animals

The cefoperazone-sulbactam combination. In vitro qualities including beta-lactamase stability, antimicrobial activity, and interpretive criteria for disk diffusion tests.

Three concentrations of the penicillanic acid sulfone, sulbactam were tested in combination with cefoperazone against 632 recent clinical bacterial isolates. Cefoperazone was effective alone (less than or equal to 16 micrograms/mL) against 95% of Enterobacteriaceae and combined with 4 micrograms/mL sulbactam inhibited 99.5% of strains. This coverage of enteric bacilli was superior to timentin (99.1%), ceftazidime (98.2%), and tobramycin (90.9%). The minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of cefoperazone-susceptible strains also were markedly decreased by sulbactam (overall MIC90s, 8.0 micrograms/mL for cefoperazone and 1.0 microgram/mL for cefoperazone and 4.0 micrograms/mL for sulbactam). Sulbactam also expanded the spectrum of cefoperazone against Acinetobacter species, some rare Pseudomonas species, and Bacteroides fragilis group species. Sulbactam had direct antimicrobial activity against the acinetobacters and Pseudomonas acidovorans, but the increased activity of cefoperazone-sulbactam against some other Pseudomonas species and anaerobes was attributed to beta-lactamase inhibition. The cefoperazone MICs against beta-lactamase producing Staphylococcus species also were lowered to the level of enzyme-deficient strains. Cefoperazone bactericidal activity was improved by 4.0 micrograms/mL sulbactam, and no antagonism was observed. beta-lactamase hydrolysis studies confirmed a slow hydrolysis of cefoperazone only by TEM beta-lactamases and a high-grade resistance to enzyme breakdown by sulbactam. Differential beta-lactamase affinity studies for cefoperazone and sulbactam showed potential efficacy and applications to plasmid-mediated TEM and OXA enzymes and only marginal effective sulbactam inhibition of Pseudomonas and Klebsiella species enzymes. Disk diffusion studies on 556 strains confirmed the applicability of the cefoperazone 75-micrograms disk to testing routine isolates other than enterococci and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. The addition of 4.0 micrograms sulbactam/mL in a fixed concentration to dilution test systems and 15 micrograms sulbactam to the 75 micrograms cefoperazone disk were recommended for in vitro tests. Susceptibility and resistant interpretive criteria for the disk and dilution tests can be applied with confidence. Only 0.4% false-susceptibility errors and a 97.5% absolute interpretive agreement were achieved using the 75 micrograms cefoperazone/15 micrograms sulbactam disk.

Anti-Bacterial Agents