Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 1978 Jan;13(1):74-7.
doi: 10.1128/AAC.13.1.74.

Treatment of experimental Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis: comparison of cephalothin, cefazolin, and methicillin

Treatment of experimental Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis: comparison of cephalothin, cefazolin, and methicillin

J Carrizosa et al. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1978 Jan.

Abstract

The effectiveness of cefazolin in Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis has been questioned because of in vitro inactivation by staphylococcal beta-lactamase. Cefazolin, although inactivated in vitro by S. aureus beta-lactamase, was as effective as cephalothin in the treatment of left-sided S. aureus endocarditis in rabbits. Cefazolin (20 mg/kg every 6 or 8 h), cephalothin (40 mg/kg every 6 h), and methicillin (40 mg/kg every 6 h), administered intramuscularly, were compared in the treatment of left-sided endocarditis caused in rabbits by a highly penicillin-resistant strain of S. aureus. The three antibiotics were all effective in reducing titers in vegetations. However, at the dose used, methicillin reduced the titers more rapidly than cephalothin or cefazolin. Cefazolin concentrations in serum were about double those achieved with cephalothin or methicillin. However, cefazolin was only half as active as methicillin and one-eighth as active as cephalothin in vitro in a serum assay. The half life in serum of cefazolin, cephalothin, and methicillin were each about 30 min. Serum bactericidal activities of the three antibiotics were very similar.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Appl Microbiol. 1965 Mar;13:248-53 - PubMed
    1. JAMA. 1977 Feb 7;237(6):569-70 - PubMed
    1. J Infect Dis. 1973 Oct;128:Suppl:S354-7 - PubMed
    1. J Clin Invest. 1973 Mar;52(3):592-8 - PubMed
    1. J Lab Clin Med. 1976 Jul;88(1):132-41 - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources