Comparative pharmacokinetics of ofloxacin and ciprofloxacin

Review of publications in which the pharmacokinetics of ofloxacin and ciprofloxacin were compared directly indicates that although similar in many respects, these fluoroquinolones exhibit three differences that may be important clinically. First, ofloxacin is more completely absorbed, achieves highe...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inThe American journal of medicine Vol. 87; no. 6C; pp. 31 - 36
Main Authors WOLFSON, J. S, HOOPER, D. C
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published New York, NY Elsevier 29.12.1989
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Review of publications in which the pharmacokinetics of ofloxacin and ciprofloxacin were compared directly indicates that although similar in many respects, these fluoroquinolones exhibit three differences that may be important clinically. First, ofloxacin is more completely absorbed, achieves higher peak serum concentrations, and has a longer terminal elimination half-life, which result in a fivefold greater area under the curve than that of ciprofloxacin when similar doses are orally administered. Ofloxacin's more favorable pharmacokinetic profile seems to compensate at least in part for the greater activity of ciprofloxacin against gram-negative bacilli in vitro. Second, ofloxacin is eliminated almost entirely via the kidneys, whereas ciprofloxacin is eliminated via both the kidneys and non-renal routes. This suggests that ciprofloxacin may be preferable for patients with variable renal function, whereas ofloxacin may be preferable for patients receiving dialysis because of the need for less frequent administration. Third, concomitant use of ciprofloxacin with either theophylline or caffeine decreases elimination and thereby results in elevated serum concentrations of these methylxanthine derivatives. Because ofloxacin does not cause clinically significant alterations in the pharmacokinetics of either theophylline or caffeine, it may be preferable for patients using these concomitantly.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-3
content type line 23
ObjectType-Review-1
ISSN:0002-9343
1555-7162