Short communication: Investigation of in vitro antibiotic susceptibility of Brucella melitensis;Kisa bildiri: Brucella melitensis'in in vitro antibiyotik duyarlιlιǧιnιn araştιrιlmasι

Mikrobiyoloji Bulteni

Volumn 42, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 125-129

  Alişkan, Hikmet ^a   Turunç, Tuba ^a   Demiroǧlu, Yusuf Ziya ^a   Çolakoǧlu, Şule ^a   Arslan, Hande ^a  

^a BASKENT UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

Antibiotic susceptibility; Brucella melitensis; Brucellosis therapy

Indexed keywords

ANTIINFECTIVE AGENT; QUINOLONE DERIVATIVE;

ARTICLE; BACTEREMIA; BONE MARROW; BRUCELLA MELITENSIS; BRUCELLOSIS; DRUG EFFECT; ENDEMIC DISEASE; HUMAN; ISOLATION AND PURIFICATION; MICROBIOLOGICAL EXAMINATION; MICROBIOLOGY; TURKEY (REPUBLIC);

ANTI-INFECTIVE AGENTS; BACTEREMIA; BONE MARROW; BRUCELLA MELITENSIS; BRUCELLOSIS; ENDEMIC DISEASES; HUMANS; MICROBIAL SENSITIVITY TESTS; QUINOLONES; TURKEY;

EID: 52349120309     PISSN: 03749096     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Young EJ. Brucella species, pp: 2386-93. In: Mandell GL, Bennett JE, Dolin R (eds), Principles and Practice of Infectious Diseases. 2000, 5th ed. Churcill Livingstone, Philadelphia.
2. Andropoulus P, Tsironi M, Deftereos S, Aessopos A, Assimakopoulos G. Acute brucellosis: presentation, diagnosis, and treatment of 144 cases. Int J Infect Dis 2007; 11: 52-7.
3. Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Saǧlik Bakanliǧi 2004 Yili Temel Saǧlik Servisi Istatistik Verileri. www.saglik.gov.tr
4. Solera J, Martinez-Alfaro E, Espinosa A. Recognition and optimum treatment of brucellosis. Drugs 1997; 53: 245-56.
5. al-Sibai MB, Halim MA, el-Shaker MM, Khan BA, Qadri SM. Efficacy of ciprofloxacin for treatment of Brucella melitensis infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1992; 36: 150-2.
6. Gur D, Kocagoz S, Akova M, Unal S. Comparison of E test to microdilution for determining in vitro activities of antibiotics against Brucella melitensis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1999; 43: 2337.
7. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards). Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing. 8th Informational Supplement. 1998. Document M100-S8, Vol.18. CLSI/NCCLS, Wayne, PA.
8. Pappas G, Christou L, Akritidis N, Tsianos EV. Quinolones for brucellosis: treating old diseases with new drugs. Clin Microbiol Infect 2006; 12: 823-5.
9. Agalar C, Usubutun S, Turkyilmaz R. Ciprofloxacin and rifampicin versus doxycycline and rifampicin in the treatment of brucellosis. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1999; 18: 535-8.
10. Pappas G, Seitaridis S, Akritidis N, Tsianos E. Treatment of Brucella spondylitis: lessons from an impossible meta-analysis and initial report of efficacy of a fluoroquinolone-containing regimen. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2004; 24: 502-7.
11. Kadikoylu G, Tuncer G, Bolaman Z, Sina M. Brucellar orchitis in innerwest Anatolia Region of Turkey. A report of 12 cases. Urol Int 2002; 69: 33-5.
12. Saltoglu N, Tasova Y, Inal AS, Seki T, Aksu HS. Efficacy of rifampicin plus doxycycline versus rifampicin plus quinolone in the treatment of brucellosis. Saudi Med J 2002; 23: 921-4.
13. Akova M, Uzun O, Akalin HE, Hayran M, Unal S, Gur D. Quinolones in treatment of human brucellosis: comparative trial of ofloxacin-rifampin versus doxycycline-rifampin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1993; 37: 1831-4.
14. Bayindir Y, Sonmez E, Aladag A, Buyukberber N. Comparison of five antimicrobial regimens for the treatment of brucellar spondylitis: a prospective, randomized study. J Chemother 2003; 15: 466-71.
15. Karabay O, Sencan I, Kayas D, Sahin I. Ofloxacin plus rifampicin versus doxycycline plus rifampicin in the treatment of brucellosis: a randomized clinical trial BMC Infect Dis 2004; 23: 18.
16. Carbon C. Comparison of side effects of levofloxacin versus other fluoroquinolones. Chemotherapy 2001; 47: 44-8.
17. Rubinstein E, Lang R, Shasha B, et al. In vitro susceptibility of Brucella melitensis to antibiotics. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1991; 35:1925-7.
18. Kocagoz S, Akova M, Altun B, Gur D, Hascelik G. In vitro activities of new quinolones against Brucella melitensis isolated in a tertiary-care hospital in Turkey. Clin Microbiol Infect 2002; 8: 240-2.
19. Trujillano-Martin i, Garcia-Sanchez E, Martinez IM, Fresnadillo MJ, Garcia-Sanchez JE, Garcia-Rodriguez JA. In vitro activities of six new fluoroquinolones against Brucella melitensis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1999; 43:194-5.
20. Khan MY, Dizon M, Kiel FW. Comparative in vitro activities of oflaxacin, difloxacin, ciprofloxacin, and other selected antimicrobial agents against Brucella melitensis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1989; 33: 1409-10.
21. Akova M, Gur D, Livermore DM, Kocagoz T, Akalin HE. In vitro activities of antibiotics alone and in combination against Brucella melitensis at neutral and acidic pHs. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1999; 43:1298-300.
22. Bodur H, Balaban N, Aksaray S, et al. Biotypes and antimicrobial susceptibilities of Brucella isolates. Scand J Infect Dis 2003; 35:337-8.
23. Baykam N, Esener H, Ergonul O, Eren S, Celikbas AK, Dokuzoguz B. In vitro antimicrobial susceptibility of Brucella species. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2004; 23: 405-7.
24. Yamazhan T, Aydemir S, Tunger A, Serter D. In vitro activities of various antimicrobials against Brucella melitensis strains in the Aegean Region in Turkey. Med Princ Pract 2005; 14: 413-6.
25. Alp E, Koc RK, Durak AC, et al. Doxycycline plus streptomycin versus ciprofloxacin plus rifampicin in spinal brucellosis. BMC Infect Dis 2006; 11: 72.
26. Sengöz G, Yaşar KK, Kutlu SB, Durdu YB, Ozdemir R, Nazlican O. E-test susceptibility results of Brucella strains for streptomycin, rifampicin, ciprofloxacin and tetracycline. Mikrobiyol Bul 2006; 40: 265-8.
27. Colakoglu S, Uncu H, Turunc T, Demiroglu YZ, Arslan H. Mycobacterium tuberculosis suşlarinin antituberküloz ilaç direnç oranlan: Başkent Üniversitesi Adana Uygulama ve Araştirma Merkezi. XXII. Türk Mikrobiyoloji Kongresi, 12-16 Eylül 2006, Belek, Antalya. Kongre Kitabi, s. 154.