4.7 Article

Comparative quantification of the in vitro activity of veterinary fluoroquinolones

Journal

VETERINARY MICROBIOLOGY
Volume 124, Issue 1-2, Pages 73-81

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2007.03.017

Keywords

veterinary antibiotics; fluoroquinolone activity; enrofloxacin; ciprofloxacin

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this study was to compare the in vitro antimicrobial activity of the veterinary fluoroquinolones against a panel of recently isolated porcine and bovine bacterial pathogens. The study used enrofloxacin as a benchmark against which other agents were compared, being the most common fluoroquinolone used in treatment of bovine and porcine infections. The activity of ciprofloxacin was also assessed as it is the main metabolite of enrofloxacin in cattle. Enrofloxacin and ciprofloxacin generally showed higher antibacterial activity, in terms Of MIC50 values, for most pathogen species when compared with marbofloxacin, difloxacin, danofloxacin and norfloxacin. Ciprofloxacin showed significantly greater in vitro antibacterial activity than enrofloxacin against M. haemolytica, P multocida and E coli, whereas enrofloxacin showed greater activity than ciprofloxacin against S. aureus. Marbofloxacin was significantly more active than enrofloxacin against M. haemolytica, E. coli and B. bronchistptica but less active against P. multocida, S. aureus, coagulase negative Staphylococci, S. dysgalactiae, S. uberis, A. pleuropneumoniae and S. suis. Danofloxacin was significantly less active than enrofloxacin against P multocida, E. coli, S. uberis, A. pleuropneumoniae and S. suis. Enrofloxacin and its metabolite ciprofloxacin showed the highest in vitro activities against most bovine pathogens tested and the porcine pathogens also showed a high degree of sensitivity to enrofloxacin. These data facilitate further pharmacokmetic/pharmacodynamic comparison of fluoroquinolones currently used in veterinary medicine. (c) 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available