Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (38)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Harding, I.
Right arrow Articles by Reed, V.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Harding, I.
Right arrow Articles by Reed, V.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy (2000) 45, 835-841
© 2000 The British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy

Teicoplanin therapy for Staphylococcus aureus septicaemia: relationship between pre-dose serum concentrations and outcome

I. Hardinga, A. P. MacGowanb,*, L. O. Whiteb, E. S. R. Darleyb and V. Reeda

a Micron Research Ltd, Upwell PE14 9AR; b Bristol Centre for Antimicrobial Research and Evaluation, North Bristol NHS Trust and the University of Bristol, Department of Medical Microbiology, Southmead Hospital, Bristol BS10 5NB, UK

Logistic regression analysis was performed on data drawn from a clinical trials database for Staphylococcus aureus septicaemia treated with teicoplanin. Variables analysed were age, body weight, mean pre-dose and post-dose serum teicoplanin concentrations, mean dose (mg or mg/kg body weight) and combination versus monotherapy. Only two variables correlated with clinical outcome at a significance level better than 0.05: age (P = 0.012) and mean pre-dose serum concentration (P = 0.010). The probability of successful treatment declined with age and increased with mean pre-dose serum concentration.

* Corresponding author. Tel: +44-117-950-5050; Fax: +44-117-959-3154; E-mail: macgowan_a{at}southmead.swest.nhs.uk


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.Home page
S. Svetitsky, L. Leibovici, and M. Paul
Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Vancomycin versus Teicoplanin: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., October 1, 2009; 53(10): 4069 - 4079.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Antimicrob ChemotherHome page
E. Lamont, R. A. Seaton, M. Macpherson, L. Semple, E. Bell, and A. H. Thomson
Development of teicoplanin dosage guidelines for patients treated within an outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT) programme
J. Antimicrob. Chemother., July 1, 2009; 64(1): 181 - 187.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Antimicrob ChemotherHome page
R. Charlesworth, M. Warner, D. M. Livermore, and A. P. R. Wilson
Comparison of four methods for detection of teicoplanin resistance in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus
J. Antimicrob. Chemother., July 1, 2006; 58(1): 186 - 189.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Antimicrob ChemotherHome page
C. G. Gemmell, D. I. Edwards, A. P. Fraise, F. K. Gould, G. L. Ridgway, R. E. Warren, and on behalf of the Joint Working Party of the Britis
Guidelines for the prophylaxis and treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections in the UK
J. Antimicrob. Chemother., April 1, 2006; 57(4): 589 - 608.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Antimicrob ChemotherHome page
T. Whitehouse, J. A. Cepeda, R. Shulman, L. Aarons, R. Nalda-Molina, C. Tobin, A. MacGowan, S. Shaw, C. Kibbler, M. Singer, et al.
Pharmacokinetic studies of linezolid and teicoplanin in the critically ill
J. Antimicrob. Chemother., March 1, 2005; 55(3): 333 - 340.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.Home page
N. Asseray, C. Jacqueline, V. Le Mabecque, E. Batard, D. Bugnon, G. Potel, and J. Caillon
Activity of Glycopeptides against Staphylococcus aureus Infection in a Rabbit Endocarditis Model: MICs Do Not Predict In Vivo Efficacy
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., February 1, 2005; 49(2): 857 - 859.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.Home page
B. Rouveix, F. Jehl, H. Drugeon, I. Brumpt, and E. Caulin
Randomized Comparison of Serum Teicoplanin Concentrations following Daily or Alternate Daily Dosing in Healthy Adults
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., July 1, 2004; 48(7): 2394 - 2399.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Antimicrob ChemotherHome page
M. Wilcox, D. Nathwani, and M. Dryden
Linezolid compared with teicoplanin for the treatment of suspected or proven Gram-positive infections
J. Antimicrob. Chemother., February 1, 2004; 53(2): 335 - 344.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Antimicrob ChemotherHome page
F. Pea, L. Brollo, P. Viale, F. Pavan, and M. Furlanut
Teicoplanin therapeutic drug monitoring in critically ill patients: a retrospective study emphasizing the importance of a loading dose
J. Antimicrob. Chemother., April 1, 2003; 51(4): 971 - 975.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Antimicrob ChemotherHome page
M. Weinbren and K. Struthers
Emergence of Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) with reduced susceptibility to teicoplanin during therapy
J. Antimicrob. Chemother., August 1, 2002; 50(2): 306 - 307.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.