Journals / Flora İnfeksiyon Hastalıkları ve Klinik Mikrobiyoloji Dergisi / 1998 / Cilt: 3 - Sayı: 2

The in-vitro activity of some antipseudomonal antibiotics against Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates from cystic fibrosis patients

Antipseudomonal antibiyotiklerin kistik fibrozis olgularından izole edilen Pseudomonas aeruginosa suşlarına in vitro etkinliği

Pages
120–124
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

These data indicate that besides MIC determinations, MBC determinations seem to be necessary especially in patients with impaired host defense mechanisms, such as cystic fibrosis patients.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Pulmonary infections due to antibiotic resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa are important problem affecting the morbidity and mortality in cystic fibrosis patients.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The MICso/MBCso ratios were as follows: amikacin 8/16, ciprofloxacin 0.5/32, ceftazidim 8/32, imi-penem 4/64.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:These data indicate that besides MIC determinations, MBC determinations seem to be necessary especially in patients with impaired host defense mechanisms, such as cystic fibrosis patients.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Pulmonary infections due to antibiotic resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa are important problem affecting the morbidity and mortality in cystic fibrosis patients. Hundred and forty isolates of P. aeruginosa from the cystic fibrosis patients followed in our hospital, were tested for antimicrobial susceptibility against amikacin, ciprofloxacin, ceftazidime and imipenem by the microbroth dilution technique recommended by NCCLS. The MICso/MBCso ratios were as follows: amikacin 8/16, ciprofloxacin 0.5/32, ceftazidim 8/32, imi-penem 4/64. On the basis of the MIC values, 50% of the strains were found to be susceptible to all of the antibiotics tested. However, when MBC values were taken into consideration, 50% of the strains were susceptible to only amikacin and ciprofloxacin. These data indicate that besides MIC determinations, MBC determinations seem to be necessary especially in patients with impaired host defense mechanisms, such as cystic fibrosis patients.

Özet

Pseudomonas aeruginosa'ya bağlı pulmoner infeksiyonlar kistik fibrozis olgularında morbidité ve mortaliteyi etkileyen önemli etkenlerdendir. Dirençli P. aeruginosa suşları tedavide ciddi sorunlara yol açmaktadır. Bu çalışmada hastanemizde izlenen kistik fibrozis olgularından izole edilen 140 adet P. aeruginosa susunun amikasin, siprofloksasin, seftazidim ve imipenem için MIC ve MBC değerleri NCCLS önerileri doğrultusunda mikrodilüsyon yöntemleriyle belirlenmiştir. Saptanan MICsO/MBCso oranları amikasin için 8/16, siprofloksasin için 0.5/2, seftazidim için 8/32, imipenem için 4/64'dür. Çalışılan suşların %50'si MIC değerlerine göre tüm antibiyotiklere duyarlı iken, MBC değerleri dikkate alındığında suşların %50'si sadece amikasin ve siprofloksasine duyarlı bulunmuştur. Bu sonuçlar gözönüne alındığında özellikle kistik fibrozis olguları gibi konakçı savunma mekanizmalarında yetersizlik olup, bakterisidal tedaviye gereksinim duyan olgularda MIC düzeyinin yanısıra MBC düzeyinin de belirlenmesinin, etken olan P. aeruginosa susunun antibiyotik duyarlılığını saptamada faydalı olacağı öne sürülebilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ŞENER, B., ARIKAN, S., GÜNALP, A. (1998). The in-vitro activity of some antipseudomonal antibiotics against Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates from cystic fibrosis patients. Flora İnfeksiyon Hastalıkları ve Klinik Mikrobiyoloji Dergisi, Cilt: 3 - Sayı: 2, 120–124. https://ajindex.com/articles/224387

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Gowan JRW, Deretic V. Microbial pathogenesis in cysticfibrosis: Mucoid Pseudomonas aeruginosaand Burk-holderia cepacia.Microbiol Rev 1996
  2. Gilligan PH. Microbiology of airway disease in patientswith cystic fibrosis. Clin Microbiol Rev 1991
  3. Prince A. Antibiotic resistance of Pseudomonas species.J Pediatr 1986
  4. Korvick JA, Yu VL. Antimicrobial agent therapy for Pse-udomonas aeruginosa. Antimicrob Agent Chemother1991
  5. Swenson JM, Hidler JA, Peterson LR. Special tests fordetecting antibacterial resistance. In: Murray PR, BaronEJ, Pfaller MA, Tenover FC, Yolken RH (eds.) Manual ofClinical Microbiology. Sixth edition, Washington: Ameri-can Society for Microbiology 1995:1356-67. 6.Gilligan PH. Pseudomonas and Burkholderia. In: Mur-ray PR, Baron EJ, Pfaller MA, Tenover FC, Yolken RH(eds). Manual of Clinical Microbiology. Sixth edition,Washington: American Society for Microbiology 1995:509-19. 7.Wahba AH, Darrell JH. The identification of atypicalstrains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Gen Microbiol1965
  6. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards.Methods for dilution antimicrobial susceptibility tests forbacteria that grow aerobically, 3 rd ed. Approved stan-dard M7-A3. National Committee for Clinical Labora-tory Standards, Villanova, Pa., 1993. 9.Ball P. Emergent resistance to ciprofloxacin amongstPseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus:Clinical significance and therapeutic approaches. J Anti-microb Chemother 1990
  7. 26 (Suppl F):165-79. 10. Dalzell AM, Sunderland D, Hart CA, Heaf DP. Ceftazidi-me treatment in csytic fibrosis: resistant organisms insputum and faeces. Thorax 1991
  8. Dostal CE, Seale JP, Yan BJ. Resistance to ciprofloxca-cin of respiratory pathogens in patients with cystic fibro-sis. Med J Austral 1992
  9. Thomassen MJ, Demko CA, Boxerbaum B, Stern RC,Kuchenbrod PJ. Multiple isolates of Pseudomonas aeru-ginosa with differing antimicrobial susceptibility patternsfrom patients with cystic fibrosis. J Infect Dis 1979
  10. Ansorg R, Müller KD, Wiora J. Comparison of inhibitoryand bactericidal activity of antipseudomonal antibioticsagainst Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates from cysticfibrosis patients. Chemotherapy 1990
  11. Prull H, Mc Donald PJ. Damage to bacteria in-vitro andits relevance to antimicrobial chemotherapy: A historicalperspective. J Antimicrob Chemother 1988
  12. Çöplü N, Zarakolu P, Güvener E. Antipseudomonal anti-