Resistance trends in antimicrobial susceptibility of anaerobic bacteria, Part I

Clinical Microbiology Newsletter

Volumn 33, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 1-8

  Goldstein, Ellie J C ^a   Citron, Diane M ^b  

^a R M ALDEN RESEARCH LABORATORY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AMINOGLYCOSIDE; AMOXICILLIN PLUS CLAVULANIC ACID; AMPICILLIN; BETA LACTAM ANTIBIOTIC; BETA LACTAMASE; BETA LACTAMASE INHIBITOR; CARBAPENEM; CEFOTETAN; CEFOXITIN; CEPHALOSPORIN; CEPHALOSPORIN DERIVATIVE; CHLORAMPHENICOL; CLINDAMYCIN; COTRIMOXAZOLE; DORIPENEM; ERTAPENEM; IMIPENEM; MEROPENEM; METRONIDAZOLE; MOXIFLOXACIN; NAFCILLIN; OXACILLIN; PIPERACILLIN; PIPERACILLIN PLUS TAZOBACTAM; QUINOLONE DERIVATIVE; SULTAMICILLIN; TIGECYCLINE; TIMENTIN; TINIDAZOLE; TROVAFLOXACIN; UNINDEXED DRUG;

AGAR DILUTION; ANAEROBIC BACTERIUM; ANTIBIOTIC RESISTANCE; ANTIBIOTIC SENSITIVITY; ARTICLE; BACTERIUM IDENTIFICATION; BACTERIUM ISOLATE; BACTEROIDES FRAGILIS; BACTEROIDES OVATUS; BACTEROIDES THETAIOTAOMICRON; BACTEROIDES VULGATUS; BILOPHILA WADSWORTHIA; BROTH DILUTION; CLINICAL LABORATORY; CLOSTRIDIA; CLOSTRIDIUM; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DISK DIFFUSION; DRUG ACTIVITY; DRUG FORMULARY; EPSILOMETER TEST; FUSOBACTERIUM; FUSOBACTERIUM NUCLEATUM; GRAM NEGATIVE BACTERIUM; GRAM POSITIVE COCCI; HOSPITAL; MINIMUM INHIBITORY CONCENTRATION; NONHUMAN; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT CARE; PORPHYROMONAS; PREVOTELLA; QUALITY CONTROL; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TREND STUDY;

EID: 78650263672     PISSN: 01964399     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinmicnews.2010.12.001     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Goldstein E.J.C., et al. National hospital survey of anaerobic culture and susceptibility methods III. Anaerobe 2008, 14:68-72.
2. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute Methods for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of anaerobic bacteria. Approved standard M11-A7 2007, Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA.
3. Citron D.M., Hecht D.W. Susceptibility test methods: anaerobic bacteria. Manual of clinical microbiology 2011, ASM Press, Washington, DC, In press. 10th ed. J. Versalovic (Ed.).
4. Roe D.E., et al. Multilaboratory comparison of anaerobe susceptibility results using 3 different agar media. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2002, 35:S40-S46.
5. Citron D.M., et al. Evaluation of the Epsilometer (E-Test) for susceptibility testing of anaerobic bacteria. J. Clin. Microbiol. 1991, 29:2197-2203.
6. Rosenblatt J.E., Gustafson D.R. Evaluation of the Etest for susceptibility testing of anaerobic bacteria. Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 1995, 22:279-284.
7. Cormican M.G., Erwin M.E., Jones R.N. False resistance to metronidazole by E-test among anaerobic bacteria; investigations of contributing test conditions and medium quality. Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 1996, 24:117-119.
8. Heseltine P.N., et al. Perforated and gangrenous appendicitis: an analysis of antibiotic failures. J. Infect. Dis. 1983, 148:322-329.
9. Goldstein E.J.C., et al. Cefoxitin in the treatment of aerobic/anaerobic infections: prospective correlation of in vitro susceptibility methods with clinical outcome. Hosp. Pract. Symp. Suppl. 1990, 25(Suppl. 4):38-45.
10. Snydman D.R., et al. Correlation of various in vitro testing methods with clinical outcomes in patients with Bacteroides group infections treated with cefoxitin: a retrospective analysis. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 1992, 36:540-544.
11. Nguyen M.H., et al. Antimicrobial resistance and clinical outcome of Bacteroides bacteremia: findings of a multicenter prospective observational trial. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2000, 30:870-876.
12. Goldstein E.J.C., et al. Post-operative infection after elective colorectal surgery: bacteriological analysis of failures in a randomized trial of cefotetan versus ertapenem prophylaxis. Surg. Infect. 2009, 10:1111-1118.
13. Hecht D.W. Anaerobes: antibiotic resistance, clinical significance, and the role of susceptibility testing. Anaerobe 2006, 12:115-121.
14. Katsandri A., et al. Two cases of infections due to multidrug-resistant Bacteroides fragilis group strains. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2006, 44:3465-3467.
15. Liu C.-Y., et al. Increasing trends in antimicrobial resistance among clinically important anaerobes and Bacteroides fragilis isolates causing nosocomial infections: emerging resistance to carbapenems. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2008, 52:3161-3168.
16. Nagy E., et al. Antimicrobial susceptibility of Bacteroides fragilis group isolates in Europe: twenty years experience. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2010, 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2010.03256.
17. Snydman D.R., et al. Multicenter study of in vitro susceptibility of the Bacteroides fragilis group, 1995 to 1996, with comparison of resistance trends from 1990 to 1996. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 1999, 43:2417-2422.
18. Snydman D.R., et al. Lessons learned from the anaerobe survey: historical perspective and review of the most recent data. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2010, 50(Suppl. 1):S26-S33.
19. Hecht D.W., Osmolski J.R., O'Keefe J.P. Variation in the susceptibility of Bacteroides fragilis group isolates from six Chicago hospitals. Clin. Infect. Dis. 1993, 16(Suppl. 4):S357-S360.
20. Koeth L.M., et al. Surveillance of susceptibility patterns in 1297 European and U.S. anaerobic and capnophilic isolates to co-amoxiclav and five other antimicrobial agents. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2004, 53:1039-1044.
21. Teng L.J., et al. High incidence of cefoxitin and clindamycin resistance among anaerobes in Taiwan. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2002, 46:2908-2913.
22. Aldridge K.E., et al. Multicenter survey of the changing in vitro antimi crobial susceptibilities of clinical isolates of Bacteroides fragilis group, Prevotella, Fusobacterium, Porphyromonas, and Peptostreptococcus species. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2001, 45:1238-1243.
23. Goldstein E.J.C., Citron D.M. Activity of a novel carbapenem, doripenem against anaerobic pathogens. Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2009, 63:447-454.
24. Goldstein E.J.C., Citron D.M., Hecht D.W. Resistance in anaerobic bacteria. Antimicrobial resistance and implications for the 21st century 2008, 207-229. Springer, New York. I.W. Fong, K. Drlica (Eds.).
25. Ednie L.M., Jacobs M.R., Appelbaum P.C. Activities of gatifloxacin compared to those of seven other agents against anaerobic organisms. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 1998, 42:2459-2462.
26. Goldstein E.J.C., et al. In vitro activity of moxifloxacin against 923 anaerobes isolated from human intra-abdominal infections. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2006, 50:148-155.
27. Jacobus N.V., et al. In vitro activities of tigecycline against the Bacteroides fragilis group. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2004, 48:1034-1036.
28. Goldstein E.J.C., et al. The comparative in vitro susceptibilities of 396 unusual anaerobic strains to tigecycline and eight other antimicrobial agents. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2006, 50:3507-3513.
29. Tanaka K., et al. Antimicrobial susceptibility and (beta)-lactamase production of Prevotella spp. and Porphyromonas spp. Anaerobe 1999, 5:461-463.
30. Pelak B.A., et al. Comparative in vitro activities of ertapenem against bacterial pathogens from patients with acute pelvic infection. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2002, 50:735-741.
31. Goldstein E.J.C., et al. United States national hospital survey of anaerobic culture and susceptibility methods. Anaerobe 1995, 1:309-314.
32. Nyfors S., et al. Emergence of penicillin resistance among Fusobacterium nucleatum populations of commensal oral flora during early childhood. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2003, 51:107-112.
33. Goldstein E.J.C., et al. Fatal sepsis due to a beta-lactamase-producing strain of Fusobacterium nucleatum subspecies polymorphum. Clin. Infect. Dis. 1995, 20:797-800.
34. Goldstein E.J.C., et al. In vitro activities of dalbavancin and nine comparator agents against anaerobic gram-positive species and corynebacteria. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2003, 47:1968-1971.
35. Hecht D.W., Osmolski J.R. Activities of garenoxacin (BMS-284756) and other agents against anaerobic clinical isolates. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2003, 47:910-916.
36. Credito K.L., Appelbaum P.C. Activity of OPT-80, a novel macrocycle, compared with those of eight other agents against selected anaerobic species. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2004, 48:4430-4434.
37. Huang H., et al. Antimicrobial resistance in Clostridium difficile. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 2009, 34:516-522.
38. Citron D.M., et al. Anaerobes isolated from intraabdominal infections (IAI) versus diabetic foot infections (DFI): differences in distribution and antimicrobial susceptibility, abstr. E-1440. Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 2005, American Society for Microbiology, Washington, DC.
39. Papaparaskevas J., et al. Moxifloxacin resistance is prevalent among Bacteroides and Prevotella species in Greece. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2008, 62:137-141.
40. Glupzynski Y.C., et al. Antimicrobial susceptibility of anaerobic bacteria in Belgium as determined by Etest methodology. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2009, 28:261-267.
41. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. 2010. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing; 20th informational supplement. CLSI document M100-S20. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA.
42. Citron D.M., et al. Bacteriology of moderate to severe diabetic foot infections and in vitro activity of antimicrobial agents. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2007, 45:2819-2828.