A rabbit model of pneumococcal meningitis was used to examine the importance of bactericidal vs. bacteriostatic antimicrobial agents in the therapy of meningitis 112 animals were infected with one of two strains of type III Streptococcus pneumoniae. Both strains were exquisitely sensitive to ampicillin, minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC)/minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC)<0.125 μg/ml. The activity of chloramphenicol against the two strains varied: strain1—MIC 2 μg/ml, MBC 16 μg/ml; strain2—MIC 1 μg/ml, MBC 2 μg/ml. Animals were treated with either ampicillin or chloramphenicol in dosages that achieved a peak bactericidal effect in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) for ampicillin against both strains. Two different dosages were used for chloramphenicol. The first dosage achieved a peak CSF concentration of 4.4±1.1 μg/ml that produced a bacteriostatic effect against strain1 and bactericidal effect against strain2. The second dosage achieved a bactericidal effect against both strains (mean peak CSF concentration 30.0 μg/ml). All animals were treated intramuscularly three times a day for 5 d. CSF was sampled daily and 3 d after discontinuation of therapy for quantitative bacterial cultures. Results demonstrate that only antimicrobial therapy that achieved a bactericidal effect in CSF was associated with cure. Over 90% of animals treated with one of the bactericidal regimens (i.e., animals in which the bacterial counts in CSF dropped >5 log10 colony-forming units [cfu]/ ml after 48 h) had sterile CSF after 5 d of treatment. On the other hand, the regimen that achieved bacteriostatic concentrations (CSF drug concentrations between the MIC and MBC) produced a drop of 2.4 log10 cfu/ml by 48 h; however, none of the animals that survived had sterile CSF after 5 d. These studies clearly demonstrate in a strictly controlled manner that maximally effective antimicrobial therapy of experimental pneumococcal meningitis depends on achieving a bactericidal effect in CSF.
W. Michael Scheld, Merle A. Sande
Usage data is cumulative from April 2023 through April 2024.
Usage | JCI | PMC |
---|---|---|
Text version | 141 | 0 |
67 | 38 | |
Scanned page | 118 | 6 |
Citation downloads | 7 | 0 |
Totals | 333 | 44 |
Total Views | 377 |
Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.
Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.