Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
6
pubmed:dateCreated
1980-10-27
pubmed:abstractText
Eight methods for the assay of chloramphenicol in clinical samples were compared with our own modification of a plate diffusion technique using Sarcina lutea and yeast extract agar. Six of the eight methods were less sensitive than originally reported, and five of them were considered unsuitable for use in clinical microbiology practice. The remaining three methods together with the S. lutea/yeast extract modification were used to assay chloramphenicol in 20 samples of serum. Twenty samples of cerebrospinal fluid were also assayed by the S. lutea/yeast extract method. Our results indicate that only the Bacillus subtilis (sensitivity 6x0 mg/l) and the S. lutea (sensitivity 2x5 mg/l) diffusion methods are suitable for use with clinical samples in routine practice. The problems of chloramphenicol toxicity, appropriate dosage regimens, and the need for assay of the drugs are considered.
pubmed:commentsCorrections
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/6249858-1262716, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/6249858-13745416, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/6249858-13843700, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/6249858-13895699, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/6249858-13976900, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/6249858-14169715, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/6249858-14329986, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/6249858-15428749, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/6249858-15436445, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/6249858-180881, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/6249858-211213, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/6249858-311186, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/6249858-340629, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/6249858-4200322, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/6249858-4341013, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/6249858-5939033, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/6249858-649538, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/6249858-679859, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/6249858-699481, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/6249858-791098, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/6249858-832646, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/6249858-900922
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
AIM
pubmed:chemical
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Jun
pubmed:issn
0021-9746
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
33
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
575-80
pubmed:dateRevised
2009-11-18
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
1980
pubmed:articleTitle
Comparison of methods available for assay of chloramphenicol in clinical specimens.
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Comparative Study