Comparative Activity of Cefepime and Other Antimicrobials Against Nosocomial Gram-Negative Pathogens in Russia | CMAC

Comparative Activity of Cefepime and Other Antimicrobials Against Nosocomial Gram-Negative Pathogens in Russia

Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. 2003; 5(3):259-274

​ Stratchounski L.S., Reshedko G.K., Edelstein M.V., Stetsiouk O.U., Ryabkova E.L., Andreeva A.S., ROSNET Study Group
nosocomial infections Enterobacteriaceae P. aeruginosa antimicrobial resis tance cefepime
Section
Antimicrobials
Type
Journal article
Publication
Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. 2003; 5(3):259-274

Abstract

The present in vitro study of antimicrobial susceptibility of nosocomial Gram,negative pathogens to cefepime and other antimicrobials has been performed by the ROSNET study group in 28 medical institutions in Russia. The most active agent against Enterobacteriaceae among cefalosporins was cefepime. The rates of non,susceptibility to cefepime in E. coli, Klebsiella spp., Enterobacter spp., Serratia spp., Proteus spp. were 4.9, 13.6, 5.1, 9.4 and 4.2%, respectively. The penicillins, including antipseudomonal and inhibitor,protected, have shown poor activity against Enterobacteriaceae. All enterobacteria strains with the exception of Providencia spp. were susceptible to imipenem. Amikacin was significantly more active than gentamicin. The most active against nosocomial P. aeruginosa were cefepime, ceftazidime and amikacin with rates of resistance 2.2, 4.3 and 5.9%, respectively. Taking into account the high activity of cefepime agains nosocomial Gram,negative bacteria it can be considered as one of drugs of choice in the treatment of nosocomial infections.

  • 1. Stratchounski L., Reshedko G., Stetsiouk O., Kretchikova O., Riabkova E. Results of Russian country-wide surveillance of antimicrobial resistance of nosocomial gramnegative bacteria (NGNB) from 28 intensive care units (ISUs). 41st ICAAC; 2001 Sep–Dec, Chicago, USA. p. 113.
  • 2. Courvalin P. Evolutionary strategy of antibiotic resistance. Bull Mem Acad R Med Belg 2002;157:301-8; discussion 308-9.
  • 3. Franklin G.A., Moore K.B., Snyder J.W., Polk H.C. Jr., Cheadle W.G. Emergence of resistant microbes in critical care units is transient, despite an unrestricted formulary and multiple antibiotic trials. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 2002;3:135-44.
  • 4. Kessler R.E. Cefepime microbiologic profile and update. Pediatr Infect Dis L 2001;20:331-6.
  • 5. Livermore D.M. β-Lactamases in laboratory and clinical resistance. Clin Microbiol Rev 1995;8:557-84.
  • 6. NCCLS Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing; Eleventh Informational Supplement, M100-S11 2001;21(1).
  • 7. Bronzwaer S.L.A.M., Goettsch W., Ollson-Liljequist B., Weil M.C.J., Vatopoulos A.C., Sprenger M.J.W. European Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance System (EARSS): objectives and organization. Eurosurveillance 1999;4(4):41.
  • 8. Kuck N.A., Jakobus N.V., Petersen P.J., Weiss W.J., Testa R.T. Comparative in vitro and in vivo activities of piperacillin combined with the β-lactamase ingibitors tazobactam, clavulanic acid and sulbactam. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1989;33:1964-9.
  • 9. Jacoby G.A., Medeiros A.A.. More extended-spectrum beta-lactamases. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1991;35:1697-704.
  • 10. Sirot J., Nicolas-Chanoine M.H., Chardon H., et al. Susceptibility of Enterobacteriaceae to β-lactam agents and fluoroquinolones: a 3-year survey in France. Clin Microbiol Infect 2002;8:207-13.
  • 11. Stratchouski L., Edelstein I., Narezkina A., Edelstein M., Pimkin M. In vitro activity of cefoperazone/sulbactam vs amoxicillin/clavulanic acid and piperacillin/tazobactam against extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing strains of Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae. Proceedings of the 12th ESCMID, 2002 Apr 24–27, Milan, Italy. p. 1413.
  • 12. Yamaguchi K., Mathai D., Biedenbach D.J., et al. Evaluation of the in vitro activity of six broad-spectrum beta-lactam antimicrobial agents tested against over 2000 clinical isolates from 22 medical centers in Japan. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 1999;34:123-34.
  • 13. Pfaller M.A., Korten V., Jones R.N., et al. Multicenter evaluation of the antimicrobial activity for seven broadspectrum β-lactams in Turkey using the E-test method. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 1999;35:65-73.
  • 14. Сидоренко С.В., Страчунский Л.С., Ахметова Л.И. и др. Результаты многоцентрового исследования сравнительной активности цефепима и других антибиотиков в отношении возбудителей тяжелых госпитальных инфекций (программа «Micromax»). Антибиотики и химиотер 1999;44:7-16.
  • 15. Karlowsky J.A., Jones M.E., Thornsberry C. Trends in antimicrobial susceptibilities among Enterobacteriaceae isolated from hospitalized patients in United States from 1998 to 2001. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2003;47:1672-80.
  • 16. Garcia-Rodriguez J.A., Jones R.N., and the MYSTIC Programme Study Study Grope. Antimicrobial resistance in gram-negative isolates from European intensive care units: data from the Meropenem Yearly Susceptibility Test Information Collection (MYSTIC) program. J Chemother 2002;14:25-32.
  • 17. Mutnick A.H., Turner P.J., Jones R.N. Emerging antimicrobial resistances among Proteus mirabilis in Europe: report from the MYSTIC program (1997–2001). J Chemother 2002;14:253-8.
  • 18. Neuhauser M.M., Weinstein R.A., Rydman R., et al. Antibiotic resistance among gram-negative bacilli in US intensive care units: implications for fluoroquinolone use. JAMA 2003;289:885-8.
  • 19. Сидоренко С.В., Резван С.П., Сперанская О.Н. и др. Сравнительная активность in vitro ампициллина, цефоперазона, их комбинаций с сульбактамом, а также других антибиотиков в отношении аэробных грамотрицательных микроорганизмов. Антибиотики и химиотер 1994;39:10-20.
  • 20. Fontana R., Lo Cascio G., Giacobone E., Romero E., Cipriani P., Sessa R., Franchino L. Resistance surveillance in Italy: four-year results from the MYSTIC program. J Chemother 2002;14:323-31.
  • 21. Livermore D.M. Multiple mechanisms of antimicrobial resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa our worst nightmareβ Clin Infect Dis 2002;34:634-40.
  • 22. Gales A.C., Jones R.N., Turnidge J., Rennie R., Ramphal R. Characterization of Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates: occurrence rates, antimicrobial susceptibility patterns, and mocular typing in the Global SENTRY antimicrobial surveillance program, 1997–1999. Clin Infect Dis 2002;32 (Suppl 2):S146-55.
  • 23. Karlowsky J.A., Draghi D.C., Jones M.E., et al. Surveillance for antimicrobial susceptibility among clinical isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Acinetobacter baumannii from hospitalized patients in the United States, 1998 to 2001. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2003;47:1681-8.
  • 24. Gales A.C., Jones R.N., Forward K.R., et al. Emerging importance of multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter species and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia as patogens in seriously ill patients geographic patterns, epidemiological features, and trends in the SENTRY antimicrobial surveillance program (1997–1999). Clin Infect Dis 2001;32 (Suppl 2):1-4-13.
  • 25. Cornaglia G., Mazzariol A., Lauretti L., Rossolini G.M., Fontana R. Hospital outbreak of carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa producing VIM-I, a novel transferable metallo-β-lactamase. Clin Infect Dis 2000;31:1119-25.
  • 26. Nordmann P., Poirel L. Emerging carbapenemases in Gram-negative aerobes. Clin Microbiol Infect 2002;8:321-31.
  • 27. Sahm D.F., Draghi D.C., Master R.N., Thornsberry C., Jones M.E., Karlowsky J.A., Critchley I.A. Pseudomonas aeruginosa antimicrobial resistance update: U.S. resistance trends from 1998 to 2001. Proceedings of the 42nd ICAAC, 2002 Sep 27–30, San Diego, USA. p. 91.
  • 28. Eldere J.V. Multicentre surveillance of Pseudomonas aeruginosa susceptibility patterns in nosocomial infections. J antimicrob Chemother 2003;51:347-52.
  • 29. Kwon N.Y., Kim J.D., Pai H.J. The resistance mechanisms of β-lactam antimicrobials in clinical isolates of Acinetobacter baumannii. Korean J Intern Med 2002; 17:94-9.
  • 30. Sugino Y., Linuma Y., Nada T. Et al. Antimicrobial activities and mechanisms of carbapenem resistance in clinical isolates of carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Acinetobacter spp. Kansenshogaku Zasshi 2001;75:662-70.
  • 31. McDonald L.C. Understandidng and controlling the threat of multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter spp. Seminare of Infection Control 2001;1:191-201.
  • 32. Jalal S., Wretlind B. Mechanisms of quinolone resistance in clinical strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Microb Drug Resist 1998;4:257-61.
  • 33. Coleman K., et al. Bacterial resistance mechanisms as therapeutic targets. J Antimicrob Chemother 1994; 33:1091-116.
  • 34. Решедько Г.К. Механизмы резистентности к аминогликозидам у нозокомиальных грамотрицательных бактерий в России: результаты многоцентрового исследования. Клин микробиол антимикроб химиотер 2001;3(2):111-25.
Views
0 Abstract
0 PDF
0 Crossref citations
Shared