Journals A - Z
A   B   C   D   E   F   G   H   I   J   K   L   M   N   O   P   Q   R   S   T   U   V   W   X   Y   Z    ALL
All Volumes


How to cite


By H. S. Ali ,I. El Neima ,H . Siddique ,
Topical Mupirocin, vehicles, oral erythromycin, experimental skin infections.
The efficacy of a new topical antiinfective agent, mupirocin in different vehicles, was compared with that of oral erythromycin.The relative activity of Mupirocin in topically applied formulations using different vehicles (ointment and cream) versus oral erythromycin was evaluated by antimicrobial activity studies. Vehicles can play a great role in enhancing drug release and imparting superior antimicrobial activity when the drug was entirely solubilized. Furthermore, drug release and in vivo response demonstrated the usefulness of in vitro release studies in predicting vehicle efficacy. The evaluation of ointment and Mupirocin cream vehicles with oral erythromycin were studied in experimental skin infections. A mouse surgical wound model infected with Staphylococcus aureus or Streptococcus pyogenes was used. Topical Mupirocin treatment was applied at 4 and 10 h postinfection oral erythromycin treatment at a clinically relevant dose was administered 4, 8, and 12 h postinfection; treatments were continued three times daily for a further 3 days. Mupirocin cream was significantly more effective than (P < 0.01; two of eight studies) Mupirocin ointment in reducing bacterial numbers. Mupirocin cream was similar in efficacy to oral erythromycin. .Mupirocin cream had efficacy to against S. aureus but was significantly superior against S. pyogenes (P < 0.01). A hamster impetigo model infected with S. aureus was also used. Topical Mupirocin or oral erythromycin treatment was administered at 24 and 30 h postinfection (also 36 h postinfection for oral therapy) and then three times daily for a further 2 days. On day 5, Mupirocin cream was significantly more effective than Mupirocin ointment in the study (P < 0.01). In impetigo infection Mupirocin cream was significantly superior (P < 0.01) to oral erythromycin against S. aureus.
تم مقارنة النشاط النسبى للميبروسين مضاد الالتهاب الموضعى المحضره فى المسحات الموضعيه ذات القواعد المختلفه المتمثله فى الكريم و المرهم بالارثرومايسين الفموى عن طريق تقييم النشاط المضاد للميكروبات. القواعد حامله الدواء لها دور فعال فى زيادة سرعة تحرر الدواء لأمتصاصه واعطاء أعلى فعاليه ضد الميكروبات خاصة عند وجود التجانس الذوبانى بين القواعد والدواء. كذلك أثبتت الدراسه أن هناك علاقة بين تحرر الدواء داخل الجسم وخارجه مما يمكن فى استعمالها فى التنبؤ عن اختيار القواعد المناسبه التى تعطى أسرع تحررا للدواء وبالتالى أسرع وأعلى فعاليه. و S. Pyogens فى هذه الدراسه تمت مقارنة الفعاليه باستعمال البشره الملتهبه تجريبيا من بكتريا تم تقييم القواعد المتمثله فى الكريم والمرهم لدواء الميبروسين ومقارنته بدواء S aureus. و الأرثرومايسين الفموى عن طريق النشاط الميكروبى. 10 ساعات والأرثرومايسين - كان استعمال دواء الميوبرسين عن طريق المسح الموضعى كل 4 الفموى كل 4,8,12 ساعه لمدة 3 أيام.وكانت النتيجه فعالية الميبروسين الملاحظه فى قاعدة الكريم S. أعلى من S. Pyogens عن القاعد المرهمى ومماثله للأرثرومايسين الفموى. كذلك النتيجه ضد aureus. كذلك اثبتت النتائج فعالية الميبروسين المحضرفى القاعد الكريمى على القاعد المرهمى و المنجز بطريقة همستر Impetigo الأرثرومايسين الفموى فى معالجة مرض ال
  1. Al-Hammadi, H., Hammadi, A. A. (2008). Answer: Can you identify thiscondition?. cfp 54: 197-197.
  2. Kratzer, C., Tobudic, S., Macfelda, K., Graninger, W., Georgopoulos, A. (2007). In Vivo Activity of a Novel Polymeric Guanidine in Experimental SkinInfection with Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob.Agents Chemother. 51: 3437-3439 .
  3. Driscoll, D. G., Young, C. L., Ochsner, U. A. (2007). Transient Loss of High-Level MupirocinResistance in Staphylococcus aureus Due to MupA Polymorphism. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 51: 2247-2248 .
  4. Rittenhouse, S., Singley, C., Hoover, J., Page, R., Payne, D. (2006). Use of the Surgical Wound Infection Model To Determine the Efficacious Dosing Regimen of Retapamulin, a Novel Topical Antibiotic. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 50: 3886-3888.
  5. Kugelberg, E., Norstrom, T., Petersen, T. K., Duvold, T., Andersson, D. I., Hughes, D.(2005). Establishment of a Superficial Skin Infection Model in Mice by Using Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pyogenes. Antimicrob. Agents
  6. Boon, R J; Beale, A S (1987). Response of Streptococcus pyogenes to therapy with amoxicillin or amoxicillin-clavulanic acid in a mouse model of mixed infection caused by Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pyogenes. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 31:1204–1209
  7. Bork, K; Brauers, J; Kresken, M (1989). Efficacy and safety of 2% mupirocin ointment in the treatment of primary and secondary skin infections—an open multicentre trial. Br J Clin Pract. 43:284–288.
  8. Britton, J W; Fajardo, J E; Krafte-Jacobs, B(1990). Comparison of mupirocin and erythromycin in the treatment of impetigo. J Paediatr. 117:827–829.
  9. Casewell, M W; Hill, R L R(1991). Minimal dose requirements for nasal mupirocin and role in the control of epidemic MRSA. J Hosp Infect. 19(Suppl. B):35–40.
  10. Cockburn, J; Gibberd, R W; Reid, A L; Sanson-Fisher, R W (1987). Determinants of noncompliance with short-term antibiotic regimens. Br Med J Clin Res. 295:814–818.
  11. Cookson, B D; Lacey, R W; Noble, W C; Reeves, D S; Wise, R; Redhead, R J (1990). Mupirocin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Lancet. 335:1095–1096.
  12. Cushing, A H; Mortimer, E A (1970). A hamster model of streptococcal impetigo. J Infect Dis. 122:224–226.
  13. Dagan, R; Bar-David, Y (1992). Double-blind study comparing erythromycin and mupirocin for treatment of impetigo in children: implications of a high prevalence of erythromycin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus strains. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 36:287–290
  14. Dajani, A S; Hill, P L; Wannamaker, L W (1971). Experimental infection of the hamster simulating human impetigo. II. Assessment of various therapeutic regimens. Pediatrics. 48:83–90
  15. Dajani, A S; Wannamaker, L W(1970). Experimental infection of the skin in the hamster simulating human impetigo. I. Natural history of the infection. JInfect Dis. 122:196–204
  16. Demidovich, C W; Wittler, R R; Ruff, M E; Bass, J W; Browning, W C (1990). Impetigo. Current etiology and comparison of penicillin, erythromycin and cephalexin therapies. Am J Dis Child. 144:1313–1315.
  17. Doebbeling, B N; Breneman, D L; Neu, H C; Aly, R. Elimination of S (1993). aureus nasal carriage in health care workers: analysis of six clinical trials with calcium mupirocin ointment. Clin Infect Dis. 17:466–474. .
  18. Fernandez, C; Gaspar, C; Torrellas, A; Vindel, A; Saez-Nieto, J A; Cruzet, F; Aguilar, L (1995). A double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of mupirocin calcium ointment for eliminating nasal carriage of S. aureus among hospital personnel. J Antimicrob Chemother. 35:399–408
  19. Fuller, A T; Mellows, G; Woolford, M; Banks, G T; Barrow, K D; Chain, E B (1971). Pseudomonic acid: an antibiotic produced by Pseudomonas fluorescens. Nature. 234:416–417
  20. Gilbert, M (1989). Topical 2% mupirocin versus 2% fusidic acid ointment in the treatment of primary and secondary skin infections. J Am Acad Dermatol. 20:1083–1087.
  21. Goldfarb, J; Crenshaw, D; O'Horo, J; Lemon, E; Blumer, J L (1988). Randomized clinical trial of topical mupirocin versus oral erythromycin for impetigo. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 32:1780–1783..
  22. Hughes, J; Mellows, G (1978). On the mode of action of pseudomonic acid:inhibition of protein synthesis in Staphylococcus aureus. J Antibiot.31:330–335.
  23. Korzeniowski, O M; Scheld, W M; Sande, M A (1977). Comparative pharmacology of cefaclor and cephalexin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 12:157–162.
  24. Langdon, C G; Mahapatra, K S (1990). Efficacy and acceptability of fusidic acid cream and mupirocin ointment in superficial skin sepsis. Curr Med Res. 48:174–180.
  25. Leyden, J J (1985). Studies on the safety of Bactroban ointment: potential for contact allergy, contact irritation, phototoxicity and photo-allergy. Excerpta Medica Curr Clin Pract Ser. 16:68–71.
  26. addin, S., S. Larochelle, R. D. Wilkinson, W. D. Carey, D. Gratton, and R. P. Haydey. (1987). Bactroban: efficacy and tolerance of a novel, new topical antibiotic vs. conventional systemic and topical treatment of primary and secondary skin infections. Contemp. Dermatol. June–July:32–39.
  27. Männistö, P T; Taskinen, J; Ottoila, P; Solkinen, A; Vuorela, A; Nykanen, S (1988). Fate of single oral doses of erythromycin acistrate, erythromycin stearate and pelleted erythromycin base analysed by mass-spectroscopy in plasma of healthy human volunteers. J Antimicrob Chemother.21(Suppl. D):33–43.
  28. McLinn, S (1990). A bacteriologically controlled, randomised study comparing the efficacy of 2% mupirocin ointment (Bactroban) with oral erythromycin in the treatment of patients with impetigo. J Am Acad Dermatol. 22:883–885.
  29. McRipley, R J; Whitney, R R (1976). Characterization and quantitation of experimental wound infections used to evaluate topical antibacterial agents. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 10:38–44
  30. Morley, P. A. R., and L. D. Munot. A comparison of sodium fusidate ointment and mupirocin ointment in superficial skin sepsis. Curr. Med. Res. Opin. 11:142–148.
  31. Noble, W C; Naidoo, J (1978). Evolution of antibiotic resistance in Staphylococcus aureus: the role of the skin. Br J Dermatol. 98:481–489.
  32. Rice, T D; Duggan, A K; DeAngelis, C (1990). Cost-effectiveness of erythromycin versus mupirocin for the treatment of impetigo in children. Am J Child. 144:443–444.
  33. Rogers, M; Dorman, D C; Gapes, M; Ly, J A M (1987). A three-year study of impetigo in Sydney. Med J Aust. 147:63–65
  34. Shanson, D C (1990). Clinical relevance of resistance to fusidic acid in Staphylococcus aureus. J Antimicrob Chemother. 25(Suppl. B):15–21
  35. Sutherland, R; Boon, R J; Griffin, K E; Masters, P J; Slocombe, B; White, A R (1985). Antibacterial activity of mupirocin (pseudomonic acid), a new antibiotic for topical use. Antimicrob Agents Chemother27:495–498.
  36. Sutherland, R; Croydon, E A P; Rolinson, G N (1970). Flucloxacillin, a new isoxazolyl penicillin, compared with oxacillin, cloxacillin and dicloxacillin. Br Med J. 4:455–460
  37. Tasker, T C G; Jackson, D. Clinical pharmacology of mupirocin. In: Wilkinson D S, Price J D (1984). , editors. Mupirocin—a novel topical antibiotic. London, England: Royal Society of Medicine. pp. 173–180.
  38. Villiger, J W; Robertson, W D; Kanji, K; Ah Chan, M; Fetherston, J; Hague, I K; Haycock, D; Hunter, P (1986). A comparison of the new topical antibiotic mupirocin (Bactroban) with oral antibiotics in the treatment of skin infections in general practice. Curr Med Res Opin. 10:339–345
  39. Wainscott, G. The use of mupirocin: an overview. In: Wilkinson D S, Price J D (1984). , editors. Mupirocin—a novel topical antibiotic. London, England: Royal Society of Medicine. pp. 173–180.
  40. White, A R; Beale, A S; Boon, R J; Griffin, K E; Masters, P J; Sutherland, R (1984). Antibacterial activity of mupirocin, an antibiotic produced by Pseudomonas fluorescens. In: Wilkinson D S, Price J D. , editors. Mupirocin—a novel topical antibiotic. London, England: Royal Society of Medicine. pp. 43–55.
  41. White, D G; Collins, P O; Rowsell, R B (1989). Topical antibiotics in the treatment of superficial skin infections in general practice—a comparison of mupirocin and sodium fusidate. J Infect. 18:221–229.
  42. White, J; Davies, B J; Go, M; Lambers, J; Jackson, D; Mellows, G (1983). Pseudomonic acid: a new topical antibacterial agent. Lancet. ii:394.
  43. Wilkinson, R D; Carey, W D (1988). Topical mupirocin versus topical neosporin in the treatment of cutaneous infections. Int J Dermatol. 27:514–515
  44. Talib N D; Torin W R (2008). Bacterial Mouth Infections in diseases of the oral mucosa , Int J Dermatol. 34:622-629
» Download Full Text: