Susceptibility testing of Haemophilus influenzae and Streptococcus pneumoniae: The effect of carbon dioxide on the susceptibility against azithromycin and clarithmycin;Empfindlichkeitsprüfung von Haemophilus influenzae und Streptococcus pneumoniae: Einfluss von kohlendioxid auf die empfindlichkeit gegen azithromycin und clarithromycin

Chemotherapie Journal

Volumn 12, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 109-114

  Rodloff, Arne C ^b   Grimm, Heinz ^c   Schmalreck, Arno ^c   Pfruender, Dietmar ^a  

^a PFIZER INC   (United States)

^b Inst fur Med Mikrobiol/Infekt   (Germany)

^c NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AZITHROMYCIN; CARBON DIOXIDE; CLARITHROMYCIN;

ANTIBACTERIAL ACTIVITY; ANTIBIOTIC SENSITIVITY; ARTICLE; ATMOSPHERE; CARBON DIOXIDE TENSION; HAEMOPHILUS INFLUENZAE; IN VITRO STUDY; INCUBATION TIME; MINIMUM INHIBITORY CONCENTRATION; NONHUMAN; STREPTOCOCCUS PNEUMONIAE;

EID: 0041830630     PISSN: 09406735     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Andreasen JJ, Nissen B, Hartzen SH. Influence of carbon-dioxide tension and medium buffer concentration on medium pH and MIC values of erythromycin for Escherichia coli ATCC 25922 and Staphylococcus aureus ATCC 25923 in a micro-aerobic atmosphere. Acta Path Microbiol Immunol Scand Sect B 1987;95:253-5.
2. Barry AL, Fuchs PC. Influence of the test medium on azithromycin and erythromycin regression statistics. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1991;10:846-9.
3. Biedenbach DJ, Jones RN, Lewis MT, Croco MAT, et al. Comparative in vitro evaluation of dirithromycin tested against recent clinical isolates of H. influenzae, M. catarrhalis, and S. pneumoniae, including effects of medium supplements and test conditions on MIC results. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 1999;33:275-82.
4. DIN 58940, Teil 4, Beiblatt 1. Methoden zur Empfindlichkeitsprüfung von mikrobiellen Krankheitserregern gegen Chemotherapeutika. Bewertungsstufen der minimalen Hemmkonzentration. MHK-Grenzwerte von antibakteriellen Wirkstoffen. Berlin: Beuth Verlag, 2000.
5. DIN 58940, Teil 82. Empfindlichkeitsprüfung von mikrobiellen Krankheitserregern gegen Chemotherapeutika. Mikrodilution. Spezielle Anforderungen an die Testung von anspruchsvollen Bakterien, Berlin: Beuth Verlag, 1999.
6. DIN 58940, Teil 10. Methoden zur Empfindlichkeitsprüfung von bakteriellen Krankheitserregem (außer Mykobakterien) gegen Chemotherapeutika. Kriterien für die Bewertung der In-vitro-Wirksamkeit neuer Chemotherapeutika. Berlin: Beuth Verlag, 1990.
7. Ferraro MJ. Should we reevaluate antibiotic breakpoints? Clin Infect Dis 2001;33(suppl 3): S227-9.
8. Flanagan PG, Paull A. Carbon dioxide requirements of Streptococcus pneumoniae and Haemophilus influenzae. J Antimicrob Chemother 1998;42:669-78.
9. Fuchs PC, Barry AL, Brown SD. Influence of variations in test methods on susceptibility of Haemophilus influenzae to ampicillin, azithromycin, clarithromycin, and telithromycin. J Clin Microbiol 2001;39:43-6.
10. Gerardo SH, Citron DM, Claros MC, Goldstein EJC. Comparison of Etest® to broth microdilution method for testing Streptococcus pneumoniae susceptibility to levofloxacin and three macrolides. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1996;40:2413-5.
11. Hamilton-Miller JMT. New BSAC sensitivity testing guidelines. J Antimicrob Chemother 1999;44:850-1.
12. Johnson MM, Hill SL, Piddock LJV. Effect of carbon dioxide on testing of susceptibilities of respiratory tract pathogens to macrolide and azalide antimicrobial agents. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1999;43:1862-5.
13. Johnson J, Bouchillon S, Pontani D. The effect of carbon dioxide on susceptibility testing of azithromycin, clarithromycin and roxithromycin against clinical isolates of Streptococcus pneumoniae and Streptococcus pyogenes by broth microdilution and the Etest: Artemis Project - first-phase study. Clin Microbiol Infect 1999;5:327-30.
14. Jorgensen JH, Ferraro MJ. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing: special needs for fastidious organisms and difficult-to-detect resistance mechanisms. Clin Infect Dis 2000;30:799-808.
15. MacGowan AP, Wise R. Establishing MIC breakpoints and the interpretation of in vitro susceptibility tests. J Antimicrob Chemother 2001;48(suppl 1):17-28.
16. Mesa Espanola de Normalización de la Sensibilidad y Resistencia a los Antimicrobianos (MENSURA). Recommendations from MENSURA for selection of antimicrobial agents for susceptibility testing and criteria for the interpretation of antibiograms. Rev Esp Quimioterap 2000;13:73-86.
17. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing; twelfth informational supplement. NCCLS Document 2002: M100-S12.
18. Nilius AM, Beyer JM, Flamm RK, Tanaka SK. Variability in susceptibilities of Haemophilus influenzae to clarithromycin and azithromycin due to medium pH. J Clin Microbiol 1997;35:1311-5.
19. Retsema JA, Brennan LA, Girard AE. Effects of environmental factors on the in vitro potency of azithromycin. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1991;10:834-42.
20. Sader HS, Del'Alamo. Etest compared to broth microdilution: discrepant results when testing macrolides against Streptococcus pneumoniae indicate a need for better clinical and serum level/MIC correlation. Braz J Infect Dis 2000;4:268-70.
21. Swenson JM, Hill BC, Thornsberry C. Screening pneumococci for penicillin resistance. J Clin Microbiol 1986;24:749-52.
22. Weightman NC, Barnham M. Effect of the incubation atmosphere on the susceptibilities of Haemophilus influenzae isolates to macrolides and amoxycillin as determined by the Etest. J Antimicrob Chemother 2000;45:405-6.