Cilt. IX - Sayı 1 Haziran 2007

EN TR

Cilt. IX - Sayı 1 Haziran 2007

Öz

Anahtar Kelimeler

-

Kaynakça

1. Esterly NA. Markovvitz M. The treatment of pyoderma in children. JAM A 1970; 212: 1667-1670.
2. Barton LL, Friedman AD . İmpetigo: a reassessment of etiology and therapy. Pediatr Dermatol 1987; 4: 185-8.
3. Dagan R. İmpetigo in childhood: Changing epidemiology and new treatments. Pediatr Ann 1993; 22: 235-240.
4. Misko ML, Terracina )R, Diven DC. The frequency of erythromycin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in impetiginized dermatoses. Pediatr Dermatol 1995; 12:12-5.
5. Nishijima S, Nakagavva M. Sensitivity of antibacterials of Staphylococcus aureus isolated from impetigo patients. J Int Med Res 1997; 25:210-3.
6. Jarvinen H, Nissinen A, Houvinen P. Erythromycin resistance in group A streptococci. Lancet 1989; 1: 1022-3.
7. Leyden JJ. Mupirocin: a nevv topical antibiotic. Semin Dermatol 1987; 1: 48-54.
8. Hughes J, Mellovvs C. O n the rnode of action of pseudomonic acid: inhibition of protein synthesis in Staphylococcus aureus. J Antibiot 1978; 31: 330-5.

9. VVard A, Campoli-Richards DM . Mupirocin: A revievv of its antibacterial activity, pharmacokinetic properties and therapeutic use. Drugs 1986; 32: 425-44.
10. Buchvald J. An evaluation of topical mupirocin in moderately severe primary and secondary skin infections. J Int Med Res 1988; 16: 66-70.
11. VVuite J, Davies Bl, G o M, Lambers J, Jackson D, Mellovvs G. Pseudomonic acid, a nevv topical antimicrobial agent. Lancet 1983; 8346(ii): 394.
12. Dagan R, Bar-David Y. Double-blind study comparing erythromycin and mupirocin for treatment of impetigo in children: Implications of a high prevalence of erythromycin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus strains. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1992; 36: 287-90.
13. Rice TD, Duggan AK, DeAngelis C. Cost-effectiveness of erythromycin versus mupirocin for the treatment of impetigo in children. Pediatrics 1992; 89: 210-4.
14. Mertz PM, Marshall DA, Eaglstein WH , Piovanetti Y, Montalvo J. Topical mupirocin treatment of impetigo is equal to oral erythromycin therapy. Arch Dermatol 1989; 125: 1069-73.
I 5. McLinn S. A bacteriologically controlled, randomized study comparing the efficacy of 2 % mupirocin ointment (Bactroban) vvith oral erythromycin in the treatment of patients vvith impetigo. J Am Acad Dermatol 1990; 22: 883-5.
16. Britton JW , Fajardo ]E, Crafte-Jacobs B. Comparison of mupirocin and erythromycin in the treatment of impetigo. J Pediatr 1990; 117(5): 827-9.
17. Dux PH, Fields L, Pollock D. 2 % topical mupirocin versus systemic erythromycin and cloxacillin in primary and secondary skin infections. Curr Ther Res 1986; 40: 933-40.
18. Arredondo JL. Efficacy and tolerance of topical mupirocin compared vvith oral dicloxacillin in the treatment of primary skin infections. Curr Ther Res 1987; 41: 121- 7.
19. Bass JW , Chan DS, Creamer KM, Thompson MVV, Malone FJ, Becker TM, Marks SN. Comparison of oral cephalexin, topical mupirocin and topical bacitracin for treatment of impetigo. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1997; 16: 708- 10.
20. VVelsh O, Saenz C. Topical mupirocin compared vvith oral ampicillin in the treatment of primary and secondary skin infections. Curr Ther Res 1 987; 41:114-20.
21. Eells LD, Merts PM, Piovanetti Y, Pekoe GM , Eaglestein W H . Topical antibiotic treatment of impetigo vvith mupirocin. Arch Dermatol 1986; 122: 1273-6.
22. Gilbert M. Topical 2 % mupirocin versus 2 % fusidic acid ointment in the treatment of primary and secondary skin infections. J A m Acad Dermatol 1989; 20: 1083- 7.
23. VVhite DG , Collins PO, Rovvsell RB. Topical antibiotics in the treatment of superficial skin infections in general practice-a comparison of of mupirocin and sodium fıı- sidate. J Infect 1989; 18: 221-9.
24. Booth JH, Benrimoj SI. Mupirocin in the treatment of impetigo. Int J Dermatol 1992; 31: 1-9.
25. Leyden JJ. Revievv of mupirocin ointment in the treatment of impetigo. Clin Pediatr (Phila) 1992; 31(9): 549-53.
26. Bork K, Brauers J, Kreşken M. Efficacy and safety of 2 % mupirocin ointment in the treatment of primary and secondary skin infeetions-an open multicenter trial. Br | Clin Prac 1989; 43: 284-8.
27. Orecchio RM, Mischler TW . A double-blind multiclinic comparative trial of mupirocin topical and its vehicle in the treatment of bacterial skin infections. Curr Ther Res 1986; 39: 82-6.
28. Sultan N, Çağlar K. Mupirosinin koagülaz pozitif ve negatif stafilokok suşlanna in-vitro etkisi. ANKE M Derg 1993; 7(2): 57.
29. Koşan E, Kocabeyoğlu O, Keskin K, Özperçin i, Birinci i, Fidan A. Mupirosinin stafilokok, streptokok ve Enterococcus faecalis suşlarına etkinliğinin mikrodilüsyon yöntemiyle araştırılması. ANKE M Derg 1995; 9(1): 17- 9.
30. Kaya D, Kaptanoğlu S, Kiraz N, Kaya E. Mupirosin (pseudomonic acid)'in yara örneklerinden izole edilen stafilokok suşlarına karşı in-vitro etkinliği. ANKE M Derg 1994; 8(2): 102.