Evidence Hub

Comparative studies on activities of antimicrobial agents against causative organisms isolated from urinary tract infections (1987). I. Susceptibility distribution

Kosakai N, Kumamoto Y, Hirose T, Tanaka N, Hikichi Y, Shigeta S, Shiraiwa Y, Yoshida H et al.

The Japanese journal of antibiotics, 1990

Abstract

Since 1979, Ikemoto et al. have been retrospectively surveying the sensitivity of major species of bacteria isolated from patients with urinary tract infections to various antibacterial agents and antibiotics. Their findings for the past year are reported below. A total of 825 clinical strains of bacteria was investigated. Of this total, Gram-positive bacteria accounted for 28.0% (231 strains) and Gram-negative bacteria for 72.0% (594 strains). Taxonomically, Escherichia coli accounted for 34.7% (286 strains), Enterococcus faecalis for 14.3% (118), Pseudomonas aeruginosa for 11.0% (91), Klebsiella pneumoniae for 7.8% (64), and coagulase-negative staphylococci for 7.3% (60). Sensitivity spectra of these major bacteria to various drugs were as follows. 1. E. faecalis was sensitive to parenteral imipenem (IPM) and ampicillin and oral vancomycin. It was also sensitive to ofloxacin (OFLX) and ciprofloxacin (CPFX), which are new quinolones. Some strains were only slightly sensitive to second and third generation cephems cefmenoxime (CMX) and cefuzonam (CZON) aminoglycosides amikacin (AMK) and arbekacin (HBK), and erythromycin which is a macrolide. 2. Staphylococcus aureus was sensitive to dicloxacillin (MDIPC) which is a penicillin drug, cefotiam (CTM) which is a cephem, IPM, minocycline (MINO), and HBK. A fairly large number of strains were only slightly sensitive to cefazolin (CEZ), OFLX and CPFX. 3. Coagulase-negative staphylococci were sensitive to MDIPC which is a penicillin…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a clinical trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free