Learn about the flu shot, COVID-19 vaccine, and our masking policy »
New to MyHealth?
Manage Your Care From Anywhere.
Access your health information from any device with MyHealth. You can message your clinic, view lab results, schedule an appointment, and pay your bill.
ALREADY HAVE AN ACCESS CODE?
DON'T HAVE AN ACCESS CODE?
NEED MORE DETAILS?
MyHealth for Mobile
Get the iPhone MyHealth app »
Get the Android MyHealth app »
Abstract
To compare the efficacy of intravenous (IV) imipenem (IPM) and a combination of IV ceftazidime (CAZ) and amikacin (AN) in the treatment of Staphylococcus aureus endophthalmitis in a rabbit model.Right eyes of 60 albino rabbits were injected with 1000 colony-forming units of S. aureus intravitreally. After 24 h, treatment with either IV IPM (37.5 mg/kg) every 8 h ( n=18) or IV CAZ (50 mg/kg) and AN (10 mg/kg) every 8 hours ( n=18) was begun and continued until the animals were killed at the indicated timepoints; 24 control animals received no treatment. The concentration of bacteria in the vitreous from six animals per group was determined microbiologically on days 2, 3, and 5 after infection, and histologic examination was performed on all eyes.The number of eyes with positive cultures on day 5 was lower in the group that received IV IPM (2/6) compared with the IV CAZ/AN group (4/6) and the control group (6/6). For the culture-positive eyes, the bacterial concentrations were significantly lower for the IV IPM group compared with the IV CAZ/AN group on days 2 and 5 ( P<0.05 and P<0.0065, respectively), but not on day 3 ( P <0.8. Bacterial counts in both treatment groups were significantly lower than in the control group ( P<0.005). Eyes in all groups, however, showed severe intraocular inflammation.IV IPM is more effective than is IV CAZ/AN in reducing the number of bacteria in an animal model of S.aureus endophthalmitis.
View details for DOI 10.1007/s00417-003-0768-8
View details for Web of Science ID 000188400600011
View details for PubMedID 14618340