↓ Skip to main content

Combined antibiotic and free radical trap treatment is effective at combating Staphylococcus-aureus-induced septic arthritis

Overview of attention for article published in Arthritis Research & Therapy, April 2002
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Combined antibiotic and free radical trap treatment is effective at combating Staphylococcus-aureus-induced septic arthritis
Published in
Arthritis Research & Therapy, April 2002
DOI 10.1186/ar406
Pubmed ID
Authors

Egidija Sakiniene, L Vincent Collins

Abstract

Although early antibiotic treatment of patients with septic arthritis eradicates bacteria, joint destruction commonly results from the unregulated host inflammatory responses to infection. The spin trap compound phenyl-N-tert-butyl nitrone (PBN) has been shown to have both anti-inflammatory and antioxidant effects. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of combined systemic administration of PBN and cloxacillin on the development of Staphylococcus aureus arthritis.Three days after Naval Medical Research Institute (NMRI) mice were infected intravenously with S. aureus LS-1, daily treatment was started with cloxacillin alone, PBN alone, or cloxacillin and PBN. Arthritis, weight loss and general condition were evaluated for each mouse, and joints were analyzed histopathologically. Systemic administration of PBN in conjunction with cloxacillin ameliorated the course of experimental S. aureus arthritis, as evidenced by an increased cure rate. Thus, combinatorial antioxidant plus antibiotic anti-inflammatory therapies represent a potentially efficacious approach to the management of septic arthritis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 2 14%
Researcher 2 14%
Student > Postgraduate 2 14%
Student > Master 2 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 14%
Other 2 14%
Unknown 2 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 21%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 14%
Social Sciences 1 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 7%
Chemistry 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 July 2016.
All research outputs
#16,046,765
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Arthritis Research & Therapy
#2,337
of 3,381 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#122,140
of 128,681 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Arthritis Research & Therapy
#16
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,381 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 128,681 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.