ライフサイエンスコーパス: ertapenem

1 and 271 patients were randomized to receive ertapenem.

2 ronidazole, ciprofloxacin/metronidazole, and ertapenem.

3 enem; 130 of them were skin-tested also with ertapenem.

4 statistical criteria for the superiority of ertapenem.

5 In this study, the efficacy of ertapenem 1 g once a day was equivalent to piperacillin/

6 We assigned patients intravenous ertapenem (1 g daily; n=295) or piperacillin/tazobactam

7 d to antibiotic therapy received intravenous ertapenem (1 g/d) for 3 days followed by 7 days of oral

8 d eravacycline, 1.0 mg/kg every 12 hours, or ertapenem, 1.0 g every 24 hours, for a minimum of four 2

9 eat groups, 245 of 311 patients treated with ertapenem (79.3%) were cured, as were 232 of 304 (76.2)

10 biologically evaluable patients treated with ertapenem (86.7%) were cured, as were 157 of the 193 (81

11 Ertapenem, a long-acting carbapenem, may be an alternati

12 enyl ring positioned on the C3 side chain of ertapenem acts as an effective internal Raman intensity

13 trometry demonstrated that the doripenem and ertapenem acyl-enzyme complexes remain stable over a tim

14 ealed an isomerization occurring in the BlaC-ertapenem adduct in which the original Delta(2)-pyrrolin

15 However, its slow rate of the hydrolysis to ertapenem also led to the presence of large amounts of c

16 71 patients were treated with Ertapenem and 71 patients were treated with Ampicillin-S

17 icant decreases in resistance were noted for ertapenem and cefoxitin.

18 the Enterobacteriaceae, nonsusceptibility to ertapenem and imipenem predicted the presence of bla(KPC

19 he detection of carbapenemase activity using ertapenem and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrom

20 usceptibility results, in vivo studies using ertapenem and meropenem in a rabbit model of P. acnes en

21 Ertapenem and piperacillin-tazobactam were each active a

22 rates were similar for the 226 who received ertapenem and the 219 who received piperacillin/tazobact

23 ined as carbapenem-nonsusceptible (excluding ertapenem) and extended-spectrum cephalosporin-resistant

24 cy and safety of antibiotic prophylaxis with ertapenem, as compared with cefotetan, in patients under

25 Using an ertapenem breakpoint of 0.25 mug/ml would efficiently de

26 were susceptible to cefepime, imipenem, and ertapenem but that with a high inoculum, more of these s

27 to be resistant to imipenem, meropenem, and ertapenem by disk diffusion susceptibility testing.

28 soak was determined to 2.2 A, while the BlaC-ertapenem complex obtained after a 90 min soak was deter

29 Direct ertapenem disk testing is simpler, more sensitive, and m

30 treaking swabs on MAC onto which a 10-microg ertapenem disk was then placed (method 2).

31 eta-lactams imipenem (IPM), meropenem (MEM), ertapenem (ERT), and ceftazidime (CAZ).

32 Imipenem (IPM), meropenem (MEM), ertapenem (ERT), and doripenem (DOR) were tested by brot

33 We evaluated detection of ertapenem (ETP) resistance and Klebsiella pneumoniae car

34 mbinations of clindamycin and rifampicin, or ertapenem followed by combination rifampicin, moxifloxac

35 sensitivity and specificity of meropenem and ertapenem for carbapenemase activity among non-Enterobac

36 eravacycline demonstrated noninferiority to ertapenem for the treatment of patients with cIAI.

37 stridium difficile infection was 1.7% in the ertapenem group and 0.6% in the cefotetan group (P=0.22)

38 ps was surgical-site infection: 17.1% in the ertapenem group and 26.2% in the cefotetan group (absolu

39 ntion-to-treat analysis, and 672 (338 in the ertapenem group and 334 in the cefotetan group) were inc

40 analysis, the failure rate was 28.0% in the ertapenem group and 42.8% in the cefotetan group (absolu

41 ly assigned to study groups, 901 (451 in the ertapenem group and 450 in the cefotetan group) qualifie

42 verall prophylactic failure was 40.2% in the ertapenem group and 50.9% in the cefotetan group (absolu

43 group and 260 of 271 patients [95.9%] in the ertapenem group).

44 In the Ertapenem group, 69 of the 71 patients (97%) were treate

45 % in the eravacycline group and 87.6% in the ertapenem group.

46 270 in the eravacycline group and 271 in the ertapenem group.

47 ears and 55.4 years for the eravacycline and ertapenem groups, respectively.

48 Ertapenem has a pharmacokinetic profile and antimicrobia

49 at C-2 of carbapenem (e.g., benzoic acid of ertapenem) has significant impact on the absorption and

50 nd the carbapenems, meropenem, imipenem, and ertapenem, have been studied by Raman microscopy.

51 acy and safety of eravacycline compared with ertapenem in adult hospitalized patients with complicate

52 nd safety of eravacycline in comparison with ertapenem in patients with cIAI requiring surgical or pe

53 -Sulbactam to that of a three-day regimen of Ertapenem in patients with localized peritonitis ranging

54 Ertapenem is more effective than cefotetan in the preven

55 The results of this trial suggest that ertapenem may be a useful option that could eliminate th

56 opionibacterium acnes ophthalmic isolates to ertapenem, meropenem, and cefepime by utilizing the Etes

57 crog/ml, and 1 microg/ml to 12 microg/ml for ertapenem, meropenem, and cefepime, respectively.

58 The imipenem, meropenem, doripenem, and ertapenem MIC50 values were 4, 2, 1, and 4 mug/ml, respe

59 pyrrolidin-4-ylthio containing side chain of ertapenem (MK-0826) is described.

60 Ertapenem nonsusceptibility had a low positive predictiv

61 From this isolate collection, all ertapenem-nonsusceptible isolates (MIC, >/=1 mug/ml; n =

62 es that harbored a carbapenemase gene (1,485 ertapenem-nonsusceptible isolates and 8 ertapenem-suscep

63 g sensitivities of Trypticase soy broth plus ertapenem or meropenem were 78% and 47%, respectively.

64 evaluations of diversified groups of over 57 ertapenem prodrugs which include alkyl, methylenedioxy,

65 positive predictive value and specificity of ertapenem resistance for KPC detection in 2,696 Enteroba

66 positive predictive value and specificity of ertapenem resistance for KPC detection were 74% and 99.2

67 The bla(NDM-1) gene was not identified in ertapenem resistant isolates.

68 ipenem and 0.18 microM and 0.017 min(-1) for ertapenem, respectively.

69 The 1.3 A diffraction data from a 10 min ertapenem-soaked crystal revealed an isomerization occur

70 pt-2-en e-2-carboxylic acid monosodium salt (ertapenem sodium, 1), has been developed.

71 ,485 ertapenem-nonsusceptible isolates and 8 ertapenem-susceptible ESBL-positive isolates) and accoun

72 iella oxytoca, and Proteus mirabilis with an ertapenem-susceptible extended-spectrum-beta-lactamase (

73 When combined with nonsusceptibility to ertapenem, the method was easy to perform and reliably d

74 tatistical noninferiority of eravacycline to ertapenem to be declared for this study.

75 , conducted from 2001 to 2004, that compared ertapenem to piperacillin-tazobactam for the treatment o

76 dings, the authors conclude that a three-day Ertapenem treatment regimen is the most effective antibi

77 aim was to assess the efficacy and safety of ertapenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam for foot infect

78 Ertapenem was a more sensitive indicator of KPC resistan

79 Ertapenem was generally well tolerated and had a similar

80 When meropenem or ertapenem was reacted with SHV-1 in solution, the Raman

81 iological outcomes for patients treated with ertapenem were equivalent to those for patients treated

82 e in vitro characterization of doripenem and ertapenem with BlaC.

83 penemases, by using imipenem, meropenem, and ertapenem with LC-MS/MS assays.

84 ducted to compare the safety and efficacy of ertapenem with piperacillin/tazobactam as therapy follow