The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Evaluation of Intravenous Ciprofloxacin in Patients With Nosocomial Lower Respiratory Tract Infections: Impact of Plasma Concentrations, Organism, Minimum Inhibitory Concentration, and Clinical Condition on Bacterial Eradication
Abstract
Fifty patients with gram-negative lower respiratory tract infections were treated with intravenous ciprofloxacin to evaluate efficacy and safety. Relationships between individual pharmacokinetics and clinical and bacteriologic outcome were studied. Ciprofloxacin concentrations in plasma were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography. Respiratory secretion cultures were obtained daily to determine the eradication day of the infecting organism. Susceptibility (minimum inhibitory concentration) to ciprofloxacin and other antimicrobials was determined using standard microdilution techniques. The mean age of the patients was 70 years. They had multiple underlying diseases, and two thirds of them were ventilator dependent at entry. Approximately 50% of the patients had failed previous treatment for the same infections. Patients infected with Enterobacteriaceae or Haemophilus influenzae with minimum inhibitory concentrations of less than 0.25 mg/L responded well to intravenous ciprofloxacin therapy (200 mg every 12 hours). The organisms were eradicated from sputum cultures usually within 1 day after ciprofloxacin therapy was started. Most clinical failures occurred in patients who were infected with Pseudomonas aeruginosa and had multiple underlying diseases. Pseudomonas aeruginosa was isolated from 10 patients with pneumonia, 2 patients with lung abscess, and 1 patient with bronchiectasis. The Pseudomonas isolate acquired resistance during ciprofloxacin treatment in 7 patients with pneumonia and in all of the remaining 3 patients. We conclude that ciprofloxacin is safe and effective at a dosage of 200 mg administered intravenously every 12 hours for nosocomial lower respiratory tract infections caused by Enterobacteriaceae or Haemophilus species. Many patients who had failed previous antibiotic treatment for Enterobacteriaceae infections had good clinical response to ciprofloxacin therapy. Studies using either higher dosages of ciprofloxacin or combination therapy should be conducted to determine if acquired resistance can be avoided in Pseudomonas infections.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Pharmacodynamics of intravenous ciprofloxacin in seriously ill patients
Forrest, A., Nix, D. E., Ballow, C. H., Goss, T. F., Birmingham, M. C., & Schentag, J. J. (1993) · Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy · doi:10.1128/aac.37.5.1073 · Cited by 1,101
Roberts, J. A., Abdul-Aziz, M. H., Lipman, J., Mouton, J. W., Vinks, A. A., Felton, T. W., Hope, W. W., Farkas, A., Neely, M. N., Schentag, J. J., et al. (2014) · The Lancet Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1016/s1473-3099(14)70036-2 · Cited by 1,046
Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia
(2012) · SpringerReference · doi:10.1007/springerreference_225126 · Cited by 406
Metadata
- Authors
- Peloquin, C. A.
- Venue
- Archives of Internal Medicine
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 1989-10-01
- Volume
- 149
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 2269
- ISSN
- 0003-9926 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2012387735
- Cited by
- 167
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 8.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Evaluation of Intravenous Ciprofloxacin in Patients With Nosocomial Lower Respiratory Tract Infections: Impact of Plasma Concentrations, Organism, Minimum Inhibitory Concentration, and Clinical Condition on Bacterial Eradication. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/archinte.1989.00390100083020
- The paper
- Peloquin, C. A. (1989). Evaluation of Intravenous Ciprofloxacin in Patients With Nosocomial Lower Respiratory Tract Infections: Impact of Plasma Concentrations, Organism, Minimum Inhibitory Concentration, and Clinical Condition on Bacterial Eradication. Archives of Internal Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.1989.00390100083020
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.