Antibiotic bone cement for the treatment of pseudomonas aeruginosa in joint arthroplasty: Comparison of tobramycin and gentamicin-loaded cements
One hundred clinical isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa were collected from 22 medical centers throughout Europe and were challenged with two aminoglycoside‐loaded bone cements, employing a modified in vitro Kirby–Bauer susceptibility model. The results of this study show that Simplex® P with tobram...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of biomedical materials research 2003-02, Vol.64B (2), p.94-98 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 98 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 94 |
| container_title | Journal of biomedical materials research |
| container_volume | 64B |
| creator | Scott, Christopher P. Higham, Paul A. |
| description | One hundred clinical isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa were collected from 22 medical centers throughout Europe and were challenged with two aminoglycoside‐loaded bone cements, employing a modified in vitro Kirby–Bauer susceptibility model. The results of this study show that Simplex® P with tobramycin exhibits antibacterial activity against 98% of the strains tested, compared to 93% for Palacos with gentamicin. Additionally, for strains that were susceptible to the antibiotic bone cement formulations, the average zone of inhibition produced around the tobramycin‐loaded cement disks was approximately 25% greater than that seen around the gentamicin‐loaded cement disks. This difference was statistically significant (p ≪ 0.01). Tobramycin‐loaded bone cement is therefore the preferred formulation when addressing Pseudomonas aeruginosa in septic joint arthroplasty. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater 64B: 94–98, 2003 |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1002/jbm.b.10515 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_72956168</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>27902303</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4885-1b8d523c9d837bc66a8a2d7f319281d18f6d3b30f5958a612bbdf6bacefb3d1e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqF0U1v1DAQBuAIgWgpnLgjX-CCUmJ77Tjc2hUUUCni-2iNP9J6SezFdgT7L_jJeLuhvbEnj61n5pU8VfUYN8e4aciLlRqPVSkZZneqQ8wYqRedwHdv6pYeVA9SWhXMG0bvVweYMMwbQQ-rPyc-O-VCdhqp4C3SdrQ-oz5ElK8sytFCvn4JPVonO5kwBg8JgY3TpfMhAXIerYIrBGK-imE9QMqbl2gZxjVEl4Lf9uagIowbXTB4gy7LSBhdudZDAGPNHJweVvd6GJJ9NJ9H1dfXr74s39TnH87eLk_Oa70QgtVYCcMI1Z0RtFWacxBATNtT3BGBDRY9N1TRpmcdE8AxUcr0XIG2vaIGW3pUPdvNXcfwc7Ipy9ElbYcBvA1Tki3pGMdc7IWk7RpCG7oX4o6Vb8d4PxQt5h1rC3y-gzqGlKLt5Tq6EeJG4kZudy_L7qWS17sv-sk8dlKjNbd2XnYBT2cAScPQR_DapVu3YJR2ZBuLd-6XG-zmf5ny3en7f-H1rselbH_f9ED8IXlLWya_X5zJz1xcfPr4TUhG_wKp0NjW</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>18716957</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Antibiotic bone cement for the treatment of pseudomonas aeruginosa in joint arthroplasty: Comparison of tobramycin and gentamicin-loaded cements</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Scott, Christopher P. ; Higham, Paul A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Scott, Christopher P. ; Higham, Paul A.</creatorcontrib><description>One hundred clinical isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa were collected from 22 medical centers throughout Europe and were challenged with two aminoglycoside‐loaded bone cements, employing a modified in vitro Kirby–Bauer susceptibility model. The results of this study show that Simplex® P with tobramycin exhibits antibacterial activity against 98% of the strains tested, compared to 93% for Palacos with gentamicin. Additionally, for strains that were susceptible to the antibiotic bone cement formulations, the average zone of inhibition produced around the tobramycin‐loaded cement disks was approximately 25% greater than that seen around the gentamicin‐loaded cement disks. This difference was statistically significant (p ≪ 0.01). Tobramycin‐loaded bone cement is therefore the preferred formulation when addressing Pseudomonas aeruginosa in septic joint arthroplasty. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater 64B: 94–98, 2003</description><identifier>ISSN: 1552-4973</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 0021-9304</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1552-4981</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-4636</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/jbm.b.10515</identifier><identifier>PMID: 12516083</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JBMRBG</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</publisher><subject><![CDATA[Anti-Bacterial Agents - administration & dosage ; Biological and medical sciences ; bone cement ; Bone Cements ; gentamicin ; Gentamicins - administration & dosage ; Humans ; In Vitro Techniques ; Joint Prosthesis ; Medical sciences ; Microbial Sensitivity Tests ; Prosthesis-Related Infections - drug therapy ; Prosthesis-Related Infections - microbiology ; Prosthesis-Related Infections - prevention & control ; Pseudomonas aeruginosa ; Pseudomonas aeruginosa - drug effects ; Pseudomonas aeruginosa - isolation & purification ; Pseudomonas Infections - drug therapy ; Pseudomonas Infections - microbiology ; Pseudomonas Infections - prevention & control ; resistance ; tobramycin ; Tobramycin - administration & dosage]]></subject><ispartof>Journal of biomedical materials research, 2003-02, Vol.64B (2), p.94-98</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</rights><rights>2003 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>(c) 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4885-1b8d523c9d837bc66a8a2d7f319281d18f6d3b30f5958a612bbdf6bacefb3d1e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4885-1b8d523c9d837bc66a8a2d7f319281d18f6d3b30f5958a612bbdf6bacefb3d1e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fjbm.b.10515$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fjbm.b.10515$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=14533927$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12516083$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Scott, Christopher P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Higham, Paul A.</creatorcontrib><title>Antibiotic bone cement for the treatment of pseudomonas aeruginosa in joint arthroplasty: Comparison of tobramycin and gentamicin-loaded cements</title><title>Journal of biomedical materials research</title><addtitle>J. Biomed. Mater. Res</addtitle><description>One hundred clinical isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa were collected from 22 medical centers throughout Europe and were challenged with two aminoglycoside‐loaded bone cements, employing a modified in vitro Kirby–Bauer susceptibility model. The results of this study show that Simplex® P with tobramycin exhibits antibacterial activity against 98% of the strains tested, compared to 93% for Palacos with gentamicin. Additionally, for strains that were susceptible to the antibiotic bone cement formulations, the average zone of inhibition produced around the tobramycin‐loaded cement disks was approximately 25% greater than that seen around the gentamicin‐loaded cement disks. This difference was statistically significant (p ≪ 0.01). Tobramycin‐loaded bone cement is therefore the preferred formulation when addressing Pseudomonas aeruginosa in septic joint arthroplasty. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater 64B: 94–98, 2003</description><subject>Anti-Bacterial Agents - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>bone cement</subject><subject>Bone Cements</subject><subject>gentamicin</subject><subject>Gentamicins - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>In Vitro Techniques</subject><subject>Joint Prosthesis</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Microbial Sensitivity Tests</subject><subject>Prosthesis-Related Infections - drug therapy</subject><subject>Prosthesis-Related Infections - microbiology</subject><subject>Prosthesis-Related Infections - prevention & control</subject><subject>Pseudomonas aeruginosa</subject><subject>Pseudomonas aeruginosa - drug effects</subject><subject>Pseudomonas aeruginosa - isolation & purification</subject><subject>Pseudomonas Infections - drug therapy</subject><subject>Pseudomonas Infections - microbiology</subject><subject>Pseudomonas Infections - prevention & control</subject><subject>resistance</subject><subject>tobramycin</subject><subject>Tobramycin - administration & dosage</subject><issn>1552-4973</issn><issn>0021-9304</issn><issn>1552-4981</issn><issn>1097-4636</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2003</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqF0U1v1DAQBuAIgWgpnLgjX-CCUmJ77Tjc2hUUUCni-2iNP9J6SezFdgT7L_jJeLuhvbEnj61n5pU8VfUYN8e4aciLlRqPVSkZZneqQ8wYqRedwHdv6pYeVA9SWhXMG0bvVweYMMwbQQ-rPyc-O-VCdhqp4C3SdrQ-oz5ElK8sytFCvn4JPVonO5kwBg8JgY3TpfMhAXIerYIrBGK-imE9QMqbl2gZxjVEl4Lf9uagIowbXTB4gy7LSBhdudZDAGPNHJweVvd6GJJ9NJ9H1dfXr74s39TnH87eLk_Oa70QgtVYCcMI1Z0RtFWacxBATNtT3BGBDRY9N1TRpmcdE8AxUcr0XIG2vaIGW3pUPdvNXcfwc7Ipy9ElbYcBvA1Tki3pGMdc7IWk7RpCG7oX4o6Vb8d4PxQt5h1rC3y-gzqGlKLt5Tq6EeJG4kZudy_L7qWS17sv-sk8dlKjNbd2XnYBT2cAScPQR_DapVu3YJR2ZBuLd-6XG-zmf5ny3en7f-H1rselbH_f9ED8IXlLWya_X5zJz1xcfPr4TUhG_wKp0NjW</recordid><startdate>20030215</startdate><enddate>20030215</enddate><creator>Scott, Christopher P.</creator><creator>Higham, Paul A.</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</general><general>John Wiley & Sons</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>7SR</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20030215</creationdate><title>Antibiotic bone cement for the treatment of pseudomonas aeruginosa in joint arthroplasty: Comparison of tobramycin and gentamicin-loaded cements</title><author>Scott, Christopher P. ; Higham, Paul A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4885-1b8d523c9d837bc66a8a2d7f319281d18f6d3b30f5958a612bbdf6bacefb3d1e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2003</creationdate><topic>Anti-Bacterial Agents - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>bone cement</topic><topic>Bone Cements</topic><topic>gentamicin</topic><topic>Gentamicins - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>In Vitro Techniques</topic><topic>Joint Prosthesis</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Microbial Sensitivity Tests</topic><topic>Prosthesis-Related Infections - drug therapy</topic><topic>Prosthesis-Related Infections - microbiology</topic><topic>Prosthesis-Related Infections - prevention & control</topic><topic>Pseudomonas aeruginosa</topic><topic>Pseudomonas aeruginosa - drug effects</topic><topic>Pseudomonas aeruginosa - isolation & purification</topic><topic>Pseudomonas Infections - drug therapy</topic><topic>Pseudomonas Infections - microbiology</topic><topic>Pseudomonas Infections - prevention & control</topic><topic>resistance</topic><topic>tobramycin</topic><topic>Tobramycin - administration & dosage</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Scott, Christopher P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Higham, Paul A.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineered Materials Abstracts</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of biomedical materials research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Scott, Christopher P.</au><au>Higham, Paul A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Antibiotic bone cement for the treatment of pseudomonas aeruginosa in joint arthroplasty: Comparison of tobramycin and gentamicin-loaded cements</atitle><jtitle>Journal of biomedical materials research</jtitle><addtitle>J. Biomed. Mater. Res</addtitle><date>2003-02-15</date><risdate>2003</risdate><volume>64B</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>94</spage><epage>98</epage><pages>94-98</pages><issn>1552-4973</issn><issn>0021-9304</issn><eissn>1552-4981</eissn><eissn>1097-4636</eissn><coden>JBMRBG</coden><abstract>One hundred clinical isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa were collected from 22 medical centers throughout Europe and were challenged with two aminoglycoside‐loaded bone cements, employing a modified in vitro Kirby–Bauer susceptibility model. The results of this study show that Simplex® P with tobramycin exhibits antibacterial activity against 98% of the strains tested, compared to 93% for Palacos with gentamicin. Additionally, for strains that were susceptible to the antibiotic bone cement formulations, the average zone of inhibition produced around the tobramycin‐loaded cement disks was approximately 25% greater than that seen around the gentamicin‐loaded cement disks. This difference was statistically significant (p ≪ 0.01). Tobramycin‐loaded bone cement is therefore the preferred formulation when addressing Pseudomonas aeruginosa in septic joint arthroplasty. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater 64B: 94–98, 2003</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</pub><pmid>12516083</pmid><doi>10.1002/jbm.b.10515</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1552-4973 |
| ispartof | Journal of biomedical materials research, 2003-02, Vol.64B (2), p.94-98 |
| issn | 1552-4973 0021-9304 1552-4981 1097-4636 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_72956168 |
| source | MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
| subjects | Anti-Bacterial Agents - administration & dosage Biological and medical sciences bone cement Bone Cements gentamicin Gentamicins - administration & dosage Humans In Vitro Techniques Joint Prosthesis Medical sciences Microbial Sensitivity Tests Prosthesis-Related Infections - drug therapy Prosthesis-Related Infections - microbiology Prosthesis-Related Infections - prevention & control Pseudomonas aeruginosa Pseudomonas aeruginosa - drug effects Pseudomonas aeruginosa - isolation & purification Pseudomonas Infections - drug therapy Pseudomonas Infections - microbiology Pseudomonas Infections - prevention & control resistance tobramycin Tobramycin - administration & dosage |
| title | Antibiotic bone cement for the treatment of pseudomonas aeruginosa in joint arthroplasty: Comparison of tobramycin and gentamicin-loaded cements |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-31T19%3A13%3A06IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Antibiotic%20bone%20cement%20for%20the%20treatment%20of%20pseudomonas%20aeruginosa%20in%20joint%20arthroplasty:%20Comparison%20of%20tobramycin%20and%20gentamicin-loaded%20cements&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20biomedical%20materials%20research&rft.au=Scott,%20Christopher%20P.&rft.date=2003-02-15&rft.volume=64B&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=94&rft.epage=98&rft.pages=94-98&rft.issn=1552-4973&rft.eissn=1552-4981&rft.coden=JBMRBG&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/jbm.b.10515&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E27902303%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=18716957&rft_id=info:pmid/12516083&rfr_iscdi=true |