Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-nr592 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-22T23:50:43.443Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparative trial of three heterologous anti-tetanus sera

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

I. S. R. Sinclair ,
J. St G. McCormick  and
J. G. Clark
I. S. R. Sinclair
Affiliation:
The Royal Infirmary, Edinburgh
J. St G. McCormick
Affiliation:
The Royal Infirmary, Edinburgh
J. G. Clark
Affiliation:
The Royal Infirmary, Edinburgh
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The three heterologous anti-sera currently provided for tetanus prophylaxis have been compared with reference to the production of untoward reactions in 498 patients, and to the blood antitoxin concentrations produced in 76 patients. Equine serum, although giving rise to more reactions, was the only effective agent in terms of the levels and duration of serum antitoxin concentration produced. The local response to a test dose of any of the three sera is not a reliable guide to immediate or late general reactions.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 69 , Issue 2 , June 1971 , pp. 201 - 207
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1971

References

REFERENCES

Binns, P. M. (1961). An analysis of tetanus prophylaxis in 3, 455 cases. British Journal of Preventive and Social Medicine 15, 180.Google ScholarPubMed
Cox, C. A., Knowelden, J. & Sharrard, W. J. W. (1963). Tetanus prophylaxis. British Medical Journal ii, 1360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dresser, D. W. (1962). Specific inhibition of antibody production. II. Paralysis induced in adult mice by small quantities of protein antigen. Immunology 5, 378.Google ScholarPubMed
Gery, I. & Waksman, B. H. (1967). Role of the thymus in tolerance. V. Suppressive effect of treatment with nonaggregated and aggregated bovine gamma-globulin on specific immune responses in normal adult rats. Journal of Immunology 98, 446.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Glenny, A. T. & Stevens, M. F. (1938). The laboratory control of tetanus prophylaxis. Journal of the Royal Army Medical Corps 70, 308.Google Scholar
King, R. D., Kaiser, G. C., Lempke, R. E. & Ruster, M. I. H. (1963). The delayed anamnestic response to tetanus toxoid. Surgery, Gynecology and Obstetrics 116, 745.Google ScholarPubMed
Laurent, L. J. M. & Parish, H. J. (1962). Unreliability of local reactions to serum as tests for general sensitivity. British Journal of Preventive and Social Medicine 16, 111.Google ScholarPubMed
McComb, J. A. (1964). The prophylactic dose of homologous tetanus antitoxin. New England Journal of Medicine 270, 175.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ministry of Health Advisory Group on Protection against Tetanus (1964). British Medical Journal, ii, 243.Google Scholar
Rubbo, S. D. (1966). New approaches to tetanus prophylaxis. Lancet ii, 449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, J. W. G. (1964). Penicillin in prevention of tetanus. British Medical Journal ii, 1293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trinca, J. C. & Campbell, Reid J. (1967). Prevention of tetanus by antitoxin of bovine origin. Lancet i, 76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, W. G., Gall, D., Barnes, G. M., Barker, E., Griffith, A. H. & Smith, J. W. G. (1969). Duration of immunity after active immunisation against tetanus. Lancet ii, 95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar