Evidence Hub

Comparison of azithromycin and moxifloxacin against bacterial isolates causing conjunctivitis

Ohnsman C, Ritterband D, O'Brien T, Girgis D, Kabat A

Current medical research and opinion, 2007

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine in vitro resistance to azithromycin and moxifloxacin in bacterial conjunctivitis isolates.

METHODS: MIC90s (Minimum Inhibitory Concentration) and resistance rates to azithromycin and moxifloxacin were determined based upon microtiter broth dilution and/or antimicrobial gradient test strips in a multicenter phase III study and confirmed externally.

RESULTS: The most common isolates collected from bacterial conjunctivitis patients in the phase III study were Haemophilus influenzae (40.6%), followed by Staphylococcus epidermidis (19.3%), Propionibacterium acnes (17.3%), Streptococcus pneumoniae (16.8%), and Staphylococcus aureus (0.06%). MIC90s for all of these organisms were well below established resistance breakpoints for moxifloxacin, indicating no bacterial resistance. On the other hand, the MIC90 for H. influenzae was 3-fold higher than the resistance breakpoint for azithromycin, > or = 128-fold higher for S. epidermidis, 16-fold higher for S. pneumoniae and > or = 128-fold higher for S. aureus, indicating moderate to very high bacterial resistance to azithromycin.

CONCLUSIONS: Resistance to azithromycin is more common than resistance to moxifloxacin in clinical isolates causing bacterial conjunctivitis.

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