Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About AAC
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • AAC Podcast
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About AAC
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • AAC Podcast
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
Research Article

Randomized, double-blind comparison of ceftazidime and moxalactam in complicated urinary tract infections.

E A Horowitz, L C Preheim, T J Safranek, M P Pugsley, C C Sanders, M J Bittner
E A Horowitz
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
L C Preheim
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
T J Safranek
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
M P Pugsley
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
C C Sanders
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
M J Bittner
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1128/AAC.28.2.299
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

Sixty-seven patients with complicated urinary tract infections were randomized in double-blind fashion to ceftazidime or moxalactam (MOX). A total of 54 patients were evaluable, 27 in each group. Patients received 500 mg of antibiotic intravenously every 12 h, except for those with Pseudomonas aeruginosa randomized to MOX who received 2 g intravenously every 12 h. Toxic effects with ceftazidime were experienced by the following number of patients: pain with infusion, one; posttherapy diarrhea, one; liver function test elevations, two; and neutropenia, one. Toxic effects with MOX were experienced by the following number of patients: liver function test elevations, two; and prolonged prothrombin time, one. All resolved. At 1 week posttherapy, bacteriologic results were 74% cured, 11% relapsed, 15% reinfection with ceftazidime and 52% cured, 33% relapsed, and 19% reinfection with MOX. Ceftazidime was effective for infections caused by MOX-resistant P. aeruginosa. P. aeruginosa resistant to MOX and other beta-lactams was isolated from one patient after MOX therapy. Enterococcal reinfection was common in both groups.

PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Randomized, double-blind comparison of ceftazidime and moxalactam in complicated urinary tract infections.
E A Horowitz, L C Preheim, T J Safranek, M P Pugsley, C C Sanders, M J Bittner
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy Aug 1985, 28 (2) 299-301; DOI: 10.1128/AAC.28.2.299

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Randomized, double-blind comparison of ceftazidime and moxalactam in complicated urinary tract infections.
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Randomized, double-blind comparison of ceftazidime and moxalactam in complicated urinary tract infections.
E A Horowitz, L C Preheim, T J Safranek, M P Pugsley, C C Sanders, M J Bittner
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy Aug 1985, 28 (2) 299-301; DOI: 10.1128/AAC.28.2.299
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About AAC
  • Editor in Chief
  • Editorial Board
  • Policies
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • AAC Podcast
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Article Types
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #AACJournal

@ASMicrobiology

       

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

Print ISSN: 0066-4804; Online ISSN: 1098-6596