戻る
「早戻しボタン」を押すと検索画面に戻ります。

今後説明を表示しない

[OK]

コーパス検索結果 (1語後でソート)

通し番号をクリックするとPubMedの該当ページを表示します
1 ent randomization (784 to placebo and 781 to levofloxacin).
2 acin-containing therapy (PPI + amoxicillin + levofloxacin).
3  did not differ significantly from that with levofloxacin.
4 le with poor dentition that was treated with levofloxacin.
5 pp mutant of CO92 and given the same dose of levofloxacin.
6  family Enterobacteriaceae were resistant to levofloxacin.
7 ng women initiated therapy with ofloxacin or levofloxacin.
8 patients who were treated for pneumonia with levofloxacin.
9 e to vancomycin and >90% were susceptible to levofloxacin.
10 e susceptible to penicillin, cefotaxime, and levofloxacin.
11 aluable precursor of the antimicrobial agent Levofloxacin.
12 scular mortality related to azithromycin and levofloxacin.
13 s a key precursor of the antimicrobial agent Levofloxacin.
14 ed to investigate the efficacy and safety of levofloxacin.
15 oxifloxacin, and 1.41 (95% CI, .91-2.18) for levofloxacin.
16  The infection was successfully treated with levofloxacin.
17 0.25 mug/ml), ethambutol (0.25 to 2 mug/ml), levofloxacin (0.12 to 1 mug/ml), moxifloxacin (0.06 to 0
18 ent for the individuals drugs were 99.1% for levofloxacin, 100% for amikacin, 97.4% for capreomycin,
19 ities were the following: ceftazidime, 100%; levofloxacin, 100%; ciprofloxacin, 95.0%; tobramycin, 90
20  (10/31) and 54.5% of patients randomized to levofloxacin (18/33, P = .094) completed prophylaxis.
21 ), ciprofloxacin (264,626 prescriptions), or levofloxacin (193,906 prescriptions).
22 r ciprofloxacin, 2.41 (95% CI, .76-7.68) for levofloxacin, 2.00 (95% CI, 1.06-3.79) for norfloxacin,
23 se rifampin (15 mg per kilogram per day) and levofloxacin (20 mg per kilogram per day) for the first
24 th higher-dose rifampicin (15 mg/kg/day) and levofloxacin (20 mg/kg/day) for the first 8 weeks.
25  fluoroquinolones included 22 of 52 (42%) to levofloxacin, 20 of 54 (37%) to ciprofloxacin, 16 of 47
26 8) for metronidazole, 18% (95% CI 15-22) for levofloxacin, 3% (95% CI 2-5) for amoxicillin, and 4% (9
27 or a 10-day modified sequential therapy with Levofloxacin 500 mg id instead of Clarithromycin (group
28 mg twice daily, amoxicillin 1 g twice daily, levofloxacin 500 mg twice daily, and tinidazole 500 mg t
29  followed by esomeprazole 40 mg twice daily, levofloxacin 500 mg twice daily, and tinidazole 500 mg t
30 1 g/d) for 3 days followed by 7 days of oral levofloxacin (500 mg once daily) and metronidazole (500
31 ducted to compare the efficacy and safety of levofloxacin (500 mg q24h for 9 months) initiated in pat
32 omly assigned to receive a 3-month course of levofloxacin (500 mg/d; n = 76) or placebo (n = 78) star
33 gle-dose azithromycin (500 mg; 106 persons), levofloxacin (500 mg; 111 persons), or rifaximin (1650 m
34  to erythromycin (94.1%) and, less commonly, levofloxacin (54.6%), in addition to beta-lactam agents.
35 88.0%; sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim, 77.5%; levofloxacin, 58.5%; oxacillin, 54.7%; ciprofloxacin, 51
36 een treatment arms (azithromycin, 3.8 hours; levofloxacin, 6.4 hours; rifaximin, 5.6 hours).
37 bactam (788, 10.3%; 95% CI, 9.6%-11.0%), and levofloxacin (694, 9.1%; 95% CI, 8.5%-9.7%).
38 n, 82%; erythromycin, 82%; clindamycin, 73%; levofloxacin, 73%; trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, 9%; an
39 xacin, 129 microM; gatifloxacin, 130 microM; levofloxacin, 915 microM; and ciprofloxacin, 966 microM.
40 indamycin (98.6%), erythromycin (99.0%), and levofloxacin (99.6%), in addition to beta-lactam agents.
41  the susceptibility rates to clindamycin and levofloxacin according to patient age group.
42 r uveitis, while current first-time users of levofloxacin (adjusted rate ratio, 1.26 [95% CI, 0.90-1.
43 tribution of the pretreated barley straw for levofloxacin adsorption was estimated based on the equil
44      A dose-ranging study with meropenem and levofloxacin alone and in combination against Pseudomona
45                  The four drugs studied were levofloxacin, amikacin, capreomycin, and ethionamide.
46 r amoxicillin/clavulanate, erythromycin, and levofloxacin among S. pneumoniae and for trimethoprim/su
47 m (S), 19 to 27 mm (I), and </=18 mm (R) for levofloxacin and >/=25 mm (S), 16 to 24 mm (I), and </=1
48 coccal isolates resistant or intermediate to levofloxacin and 124 pneumococcal isolates susceptible t
49               Ten of 12 laboratories testing levofloxacin and 4 of 4 laboratories testing ofloxacin b
50   The critical concentration established for levofloxacin and amikacin was 1.5 microg/ml, that establ
51                            The activities of levofloxacin and clarithromycin against 199 penicillin-
52                                              Levofloxacin and linezolid were tested as comparator age
53  When concentrations of various antibiotics (levofloxacin and linezolid) are pumped through the chann
54                       Bacterial resistant to levofloxacin and meropenem was seen in the control arm.
55  published MIC breakpoints for Salmonella to levofloxacin and ofloxacin, but breakpoints for assignin
56 breakpoints in the MIC zone scattergrams for levofloxacin and ofloxacin, the following disk diffusion
57 d by 1.5-fold for ceftriaxone and 2-fold for levofloxacin and remained the same for vancomycin.
58  to vancomycin (100%), linezolid (>99%), and levofloxacin and tigecycline (both >96%); imipenem susce
59 om 1.0-16.6% for ofloxacin, to 0.5-12.4% for levofloxacin, and 0.9-14.6% for moxifloxacin when tested
60 008 microg/ml) was slightly more active than levofloxacin, and E-test results were generally elevated
61  intermediate to high MICs for moxifloxacin, levofloxacin, and gentamicin were also observed among th
62  patients receiving isoniazid, gatifloxicin, levofloxacin, and moxifloxacin monotherapy.
63 y broth microdilution against ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, and ofloxacin and by disk diffusion using
64                  The MICs for ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, and ofloxacin were >32 mug/ml for all isol
65 diameters for nalidixic acid, ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, and ofloxacin were determined for 100 clin
66 2-agent combinations of amikacin, doripenem, levofloxacin, and rifampin were quantitatively assessed
67 ommon (3.8%, 4.4%, and 1.9% in azithromycin, levofloxacin, and rifaximin arms, respectively) (P = .55
68                    Single-dose azithromycin, levofloxacin, and rifaximin with loperamide were compara
69 ee new generation quinolones: trovafloxacin, levofloxacin, and sparfloxacin) on the DNA cleavage/reli
70  ciprofloxacin, gatifloxacin, grepafloxacin, levofloxacin, and trovafloxacin were above the maximal s
71 erial infections, treatment with vancomycin, levofloxacin, and voriconazole prophylaxis resulted in n
72         Both fluorophores and the antibiotic levofloxacin are attached to this bio-orthogonal amino a
73 ted incidence of severe tenosynovitis in the levofloxacin arm (18.2%).
74 luded (31 in the isoniazid arm and 33 in the levofloxacin arm).
75   Treatments were saline (negative control), levofloxacin at 15 mg/kg every 12 h (positive control),
76                                Compared with levofloxacin, azithromycin was not inferior (P = .01).
77 s occurred in 81.4%, 78.3%, and 74.8% of the levofloxacin, azithromycin, and rifaximin arms, respecti
78 o compare the efficacy of Clarithromycin and Levofloxacin-based sequential quadruple therapies as fir
79                                      Ten-day Levofloxacin-based sequential treatment achieved inadequ
80 treatment was significantly higher than with Levofloxacin-based therapy (90%, CI95%: 84-96% vs. 79%,
81 s within the triple therapy; moxifloxacin or levofloxacin-based triple therapy were both associated w
82 cultures were resistant to ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin, but all 15 strains were susceptible to spa
83  Very major discrepancies were not seen with levofloxacin, but occurred with clarithromycin in five s
84 tions for Mycobacterium tuberculosis against levofloxacin by the traditional reference method, agar p
85 (AORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of levofloxacin, ciprofloxacin, and moxifloxacin compared w
86                              In the cases of levofloxacin, ciprofloxacin, and ofloxacin, inhibition o
87 06 to November 2007, outpatient new users of levofloxacin, ciprofloxacin, moxifloxacin, cephalosporin
88  azithromycin, clarithromycin, moxifloxacin, levofloxacin, ciprofloxacin, or amoxicillin-clavulanate
89                            Results show that levofloxacin concentrations of 2 microg/ml (BACTEC 460 a
90 was investigated at various temperatures and levofloxacin concentrations, and the activation energy w
91 andomized trial to determine whether a 5-day levofloxacin-containing quadruple concomitant regimen wa
92                                 Five days of levofloxacin-containing quadruple concomitant therapy is
93                                    Quadruple Levofloxacin-containing regimens could be an option for
94 adicating H pylori infection than 10 days of levofloxacin-containing sequential therapy.
95 ecommended rescue therapies include PBMT and levofloxacin-containing therapy (PPI + amoxicillin + lev
96 ction site and had an MIC of the pathogen to levofloxacin determined.
97 r quinolones (garenoxacin, gatifloxacin, and levofloxacin, each with a MIC at which 90 percent of the
98 gorical agreements for the ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin Etests were 89.6 and 83.7%, respectively.
99 mized to receive either the oral concomitant levofloxacin, ethambutol, azithromycin, and rifampin (CL
100    A new regimen combining four antibiotics (levofloxacin, ethambutol, azithromycin, and rifamycin) h
101 th ticarcillin, gentamicin and vancomycin or levofloxacin eye drops leading to enucleation in one cas
102   Ceftolozane-tazobactam was non-inferior to levofloxacin for composite cure (306 [76.9%] of 398 vs 2
103       Minor discrepancies were obtained with levofloxacin for one strain (0.5%) by microdilution and
104                 In this paper, adsorption of levofloxacin from artificial contaminated water was done
105 ant to the newer fluoroquinolones, including levofloxacin, gatifloxacin, gemifloxacin, and garenoxaci
106                                              Levofloxacin generated clinical and microbiological resp
107                                              Levofloxacin, gentamicin, and tetracycline were active a
108 mec-IV strains to clindamycin, erythromycin, levofloxacin, gentamicin, rifampin, minocycline, and tri
109 infection in 15.7 percent of patients in the levofloxacin group and 21.6 percent of patients in the p
110 he mean follow-up time was 46.5 weeks in the levofloxacin group and 46.3 weeks in the placebo group (
111 viruria occurred in 22 patients (29%) in the levofloxacin group and in 26 patients (33.3%) in the pla
112 rapy course, 10.8 percent of patients in the levofloxacin group had at least one febrile episode, as
113 chemotherapy, 3.5 percent of patients in the levofloxacin group had at least one febrile episode, as
114 lates usually sensitive to quinolones in the levofloxacin group vs placebo (14/24 [58.3%] vs 15/45 [3
115 e of ATP was trovafloxacin > ciprofloxacin > levofloxacin &gt; sparfloxacin.
116 s (minimum inhibitory concentration [MIC] to levofloxacin, &gt; or = 0.125 microg/mL) were identified.
117                                          For levofloxacin, &gt;/=99.0% of strains were susceptible at </
118 estis CO92 and given a subinhibitory dose of levofloxacin had acute inflammation, edema, and masses o
119                       Positive control mice (levofloxacin) had 100% survivorship in both neutropenic
120 data support using targeted prophylaxis with levofloxacin in children undergoing induction chemothera
121            Major discrepancies occurred with levofloxacin in one strain (0.5%) by microdilution but w
122 actam led to better responses than high-dose levofloxacin in patients with complicated lower-urinary-
123                To determine the stability of levofloxacin in the two newer test systems (BACTEC 460 a
124 y transplant recipients, a 3-month course of levofloxacin initiated early following transplantation d
125                                 Prophylactic levofloxacin is effective regardless of age, PS, or tumo
126 stance to metronidazole, clarithromycin, and levofloxacin is more common among H. pylori isolates fro
127                            Results show that levofloxacin is stable over the course of testing.
128                                    High-dose levofloxacin (L) (1,000 mg) was as active as moxifloxaci
129  providing a longer window for initiation of levofloxacin (LEVO) treatment (40 mg/kg).
130 cin (CLI), erythromycin (ERY), gatifloxacin, levofloxacin, linezolid, meropenem, penicillin (PEN), te
131 eatments (Group B, n = 51) and no history of levofloxacin (LVX) consumption were prescribed pantopraz
132 ug resistant TB therapy: moxifloxacin (MXF), levofloxacin (LVX) or gatifloxacin (GFX).
133                                              Levofloxacin may pose the least risk for uveitis compare
134 loxacin, gatifloxacin, gentamicin, imipenem, levofloxacin, meropenem, tobramycin, and trimethoprim-su
135                    We confirmed that the new levofloxacin MIC breakpoints resulted in the highest cat
136 l), ceftriaxone (MIC90s, 0.5 microg/ml), and levofloxacin (MIC90s, < or =0.03 to 0.06 microg/ml).
137                                              Levofloxacin MICs resulted in a bimodal pattern with val
138 wide, and all patients colonized with FQREC (levofloxacin minimum inhibitory concentration, >/=8 mug/
139                                              Levofloxacin monotherapy selected for resistance to itse
140  findings were reported regarding the use of levofloxacin/moxifloxacin in the first-line treatment; t
141                          We characterized 32 levofloxacin-nonsusceptible Streptococcus pneumoniae (LN
142                                  Neither the levofloxacin nor the ofloxacin disk yielded good separat
143 romycin of >0.25 mug/ml, and 16% had MICs to levofloxacin of >2 mug/ml.
144                                              Levofloxacin, oflaxacin, and perfloxacin were most likel
145 ploratory data support offering prophylactic levofloxacin on cycle 1 only of myelosuppressive cancer
146  every 8 h or intravenous high-dose (750 mg) levofloxacin once daily for 7 days.
147 andomly assigned to receive either 500 mg of levofloxacin once daily or matching placebo for seven da
148 ultures showed that the strains resistant to levofloxacin or gatifloxacin were associated with higher
149 07 to 2010, who received intravenous or oral levofloxacin or moxifloxacin.
150 nteers, we confirmed the cross-reactivity of levofloxacin or ofloxacin with these opiate screening as
151  uveitis cases, current use of moxifloxacin, levofloxacin, or ciprofloxacin hydrochloride was compare
152 r rifampin, 97.6% for quinolones (ofloxacin, levofloxacin, or moxifloxacin), 99.2% for amikacin, 99.2
153  to clindamycin, tetracycline, erythromycin, levofloxacin, or mupirocin was detected in a large propo
154 d, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial of levofloxacin (P = .01).
155                                Meropenem and levofloxacin penetrations into epithelial lining fluid w
156                                              Levofloxacin prophylaxis alone reduced these infections,
157                                              Levofloxacin prophylaxis also minimized the use of treat
158                                              Levofloxacin prophylaxis of tuberculosis in liver transp
159 ts, 173 received no prophylaxis, 69 received levofloxacin prophylaxis, and 102 received other prophyl
160 mes in patients who received no prophylaxis, levofloxacin prophylaxis, or other prophylaxis during in
161                           The combination of levofloxacin-PZA-ethambutol had intermediate bactericida
162  tumors or lymphoma, the prophylactic use of levofloxacin reduces the incidence of fever, probable in
163                                              Levofloxacin, representative of an important class of fl
164 illin resistance in 10/531 (2%) persons, and levofloxacin resistance in 30/155 (19%) persons; no tetr
165                                              Levofloxacin resistance increased from 14.3% (2005) to 5
166 alence of metronidazole, clarithromycin, and levofloxacin resistance varied by region.
167                    When tested against MSSA, levofloxacin resistance was higher among isolates from p
168              Seventy-eight (96.3%) of the 81 levofloxacin-resistant isolates analyzed possessed multi
169 y tests with a subset of pan-susceptible and levofloxacin-resistant isolates validated the selected t
170  isolates and approximately one-third of the levofloxacin-resistant isolates were multidrug resistant
171 ominant clone with a significant increase in levofloxacin-resistant isolates.
172                                          The levofloxacin-resistant strains either were isolated from
173  3,133 erythromycin-resistant strains and 81 levofloxacin-resistant strains, were collected from 206
174 e strains while permitting the growth of all levofloxacin-resistant strains.
175  Treatment with intravenous followed by oral levofloxacin resulted in cure.
176 evalence of resistance to clarithromycin and levofloxacin rose significantly over time during the per
177                            Ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin susceptibility for all tested pathogens was
178                                              Levofloxacin susceptibility was determined by broth micr
179                                Next, optimum levofloxacin test concentrations were determined for AP,
180 ive antibiotics, amoxicillin, metronidazole, levofloxacin, tetracyclin, and clarithromycin, commonly
181                                              Levofloxacin, the active l-isomer of the quinolone oflox
182  57 (93%) of 61 isolates were susceptible to levofloxacin (third-generation fluoroquinolone).
183     These findings do not support the use of levofloxacin to prevent posttransplant BK virus infectio
184                               Meropenem plus levofloxacin treatment was shown to be a promising combi
185 -generation fluoroquinolone (moxifloxacin or levofloxacin) use and patient mortality, adjusting for r
186 ast, susceptibility rates to clindamycin and levofloxacin varied from 94.0% and 60.7% (aged 6-17 year
187                                              Levofloxacin was administered as an infusion of 500 mg/h
188                                              Levofloxacin was associated with an increased risk of ad
189    A 10-day sequential regimen that contains levofloxacin was efficient, safe, and cost saving in era
190 zed trial data, the prophylactic efficacy of levofloxacin was examined for the same subgroups.
191                   In contrast, amikacin plus levofloxacin was found to be antagonistic in time-kill s
192 atom in benzene ring attached to fluorine of levofloxacin was investigated by C K-edge X-ray absorpti
193                   Susceptibility testing for levofloxacin was performed by Etest.
194                                  Exposure to levofloxacin was significantly associated with successfu
195            The combination of meropenem plus levofloxacin was synergistic, producing good bacterial k
196                                              Levofloxacin was used in the subsequent 5 cases, with re
197       A PK curve for an approved antibiotic, levofloxacin, was generated to show utility beyond the f
198 sted ORs for azithromycin, moxifloxacin, and levofloxacin were 2.62 (95% CI, 1.69-4.06), 2.31 (95% CI
199                                Meropenem and levofloxacin were administered to partially humanize the
200 ance rates to erythromycin, clindamycin, and levofloxacin were higher in the population aged >/= 65 y
201  whereas resistance rates to clindamycin and levofloxacin were lowest among isolates from patients ag
202 0), media containing subinhibitory levels of levofloxacin were prepared and stored at 4 and 37 degree
203 ant association of current first-time use of levofloxacin with uveitis could not be identified.
204 eneration of PPIs and use of moxifloxacin or levofloxacin within triple therapy as second-line treatm

WebLSDに未収録の専門用語(用法)は "新規対訳" から投稿できます。
 
Page Top