AAC
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Iravani, A
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Iravani, A

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1991 April; 35(4): 750-752

Loracarbef versus cefaclor in the treatment of urinary tract infections in women.

A Iravani

Department of Pediatrics, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville 32610-0296.

ABSTRACT

In a double-blind, prospective, randomized study, 108 college women with acute urinary tract infections were treated for 7 days with either loracarbef (LY163892) at 200 mg once daily (n = 53) or cefaclor at 250 mg three times daily (n = 55). The cure rates at 5 to 9 days after treatment in the loracarbef and cefaclor groups were 96 and 90%, respectively. Both loracarbef and cefaclor are safe, well tolerated, and effective in the treatment of urinary tract infections in women.


Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1991 April; 35(4): 750-752




This article has been cited by other articles:




Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
Clin. Vaccine Immunol. Clin. Microbiol. Rev.
J. Clin. Microbiol. ALL ASM JOURNALS

Copyright © 1991 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.