Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 22Anesthesia and Sedative AgentsAntimicrobial agents and applicationsCancer, Stress, Anesthesia, and Immune Response

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 15 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparison of antimicrobial effects of dexmedetomidine and etomidate-lipuro with those of propofol and midazolam

Keleş, G. T., Kurutepe, S., Tok, D., Gazi, H., Dinç, G.·2006·European Journal of Anaesthesiology

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of our study was to investigate the antimicrobial effects of dexmedetomidine and etomidate-lipuro, and to compare these effects with those of midazolam and propofol on Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeroginosa, Acinetobacter baumannii and extended-spectrum beta-lactamase Escherichia coli ( E. coli ESBL). METHODS: All hypnotic dilutions were exposed to micro-organisms for 0, 30, 60, 120 and 240 min at room temperature in vitro. The inoculums taken from diluted suspensions were re-inoculated on blood agar and incubated for 18-24 h at 35 degrees C after which a count of the colonies was compared. RESULTS: Midazolam reduced the viable cells of S. aureus at 30, 60, 120 and 240 min, and also completely inhibited the growth of E. coli, P. aeroginosa, A. baumannii and E. coli ESBL. Dexmedetomidine, etomidate-lipuro and propofol, however, did not inhibit any of the micro-organisms tested. CONCLUSION: In vitro, midazolam had an antimicrobial effect on E. coli, P. aeroginosa, A. baumannii and E. coli ESBL. Like propofol and dexmedetomidine, etomidate-lipuro had no antimicrobial effect on any of the micro-organisms tested.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0265021506000949

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 16 references

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Sosis, 1993, Anesth Analg, 77, 766
  2. Farrington, 1994, naesth, 72, 415
  3. Graystone, 1997, are, 25, 640
  4. Magee, 1995, Eur J Anaesthesiol Suppl, 12, 41
  5. Crowther, 1996, Anesth Analg, 82, 475

Cited by

See all 22

Metadata

Authors
Keleş, G. T., Kurutepe, S., Tok, D., Gazi, H., & Dinç, G.
Affiliations
Manisa Celal Bayar University (TR)
Corresponding author
  • Keleş, G. T.
  • Tok, D.
Venue
European Journal of Anaesthesiology
Published
2006-12
Volume
23
Issue
12
Pages
1037-1040
ISSN
0265-0215 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2110582171
Cited by
22
References
16
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 3
FWCI
1.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Journal of Anaesthesiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Anesthesia and Sedative Agents
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology › Antimicrobial agents and applications
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Cancer, Stress, Anesthesia, and Immune Response
Keywords
dexmedetomidine, propofol, midazolam, antimicrobial activity, Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Acinetobacter baumannii, extended-spectrum beta-lactamase, anesthetic agents, bacterial growth inhibition
MeSH terms
Adrenergic alpha-Agonists, Anti-Infective Agents, Drug Evaluation, Preclinical, Equipment Contamination, Escherichia coli, Etomidate, Humans, Midazolam, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Staphylococcus aureus, Temperature, Time Factors, Propofol, Anesthetics, Intravenous, Dexmedetomidine, Acinetobacter baumannii

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

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.