Journals / Mikrobiyoloji Bülteni / 2008 / Cilt: 42 - Sayı: 1

Short communication: ınvestigation of in vitro antibiotic susceptibility of brucella melitensis

Brucella melitensis'in in vitro antibiyotik duyarlılığının araştırılması

Pages
125–129
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)

As a result, the antimicrobial susceptibilities of Brucella species should be determined periodically to avoid the possible development of resistance problems in the future.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of this study was to investigate the in vitro susceptibilities of Brucella melitensis clinical isolates against antibiotics used in conventional treatment regimens and additionally against quinolones.
📊
Key Findings & Data:A total of 65 B.melitensis strains isolated from blood and bone marrow specimens of patients who were admitted to an university hospital localized in a region endemic for brucellosis.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result, the antimicrobial susceptibilities of Brucella species should be determined periodically to avoid the possible development of resistance problems in the future.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate the in vitro susceptibilities of Brucella melitensis clinical isolates against antibiotics used in conventional treatment regimens and additionally against quinolones. A total of 65 B.melitensis strains isolated from blood and bone marrow specimens of patients who were admitted to an university hospital localized in a region endemic for brucellosis. Minimum inhibitory concentration values (MIC50 and MIC90) of trimethoprim-sulphamethoxazole (TMP-SMX), rifampin, doxycycline, ciprofloxacin, ofloxacin, sparfloxacin and levofloxacin for B.melitensis isolates have been detected by using E-test (AB Biodisk, Sweden). In our study the most effective antimicrobial agent was found to be TMP-SMX (MIC90=0.023 mg/L) followed by doxycycline (MIC90=0.032 mg/L). With regard to fluoroquinolones, the most active antibiotic was sparfloxacin (MIC90=0.064mg/L), followed by levofloxacin and ciprofloxacin (MICs90=0.125 mg/L), and ofloxacin (MIC90=0.50 mg/L). Rifampin exhibited the highest MIC90 value (1.5 mg/L), and eight isolates yielded intermediate resistance to rifampin. There was no serious resistance problem for TMP-SMX and doxycycline in our study, however, enough care should be taken for the use of rifampin which is frequently used for the treatment of tuberculosis and brucellosis which are endemic in our country. As a result, the antimicrobial susceptibilities of Brucella species should be determined periodically to avoid the possible development of resistance problems in the future.

Özet

Bu çalışmada, brusellozun endemik olduğu bölgemizde, klinik örneklerden izole edilen Brucella melitensis suşlarının, klasik tedavi rejimlerinde kullanılan antibiyotiklere ve ayrıca kinolonlara karşı in vitro duyarlılıklarının araştırılması amaçlanmıştır. Hastaların kan ve kemik iliği kültürlerinden izole edilen toplam 65 B.melitensis suşuna karşı trimetoprim-sülfametoksazol (TMP-SMX), rifampin, doksisiklin, siprofloksasin, ofloksasin, sparfloksasin ve levofloksasinin minimal inhibitor konsantrasyon (MİK50 ve MİK90) değerleri E-test yöntemi (AB Biodisk, Sweden) ile belirlenmiştir. Çalışmamızda en etkili antimikrobiyal ajanın TMP-SMX (MİK9O.023 mg/L) olduğu bulunmuş, bunu doksisiklinin (MİK90=0.032 mg/L) izlediği görülmüştür. Kinolonlar arasında ise en aktif antibiyotiğin sparfloksasin (MİK90=0.064mg/L) olduğu, bunu takiben levofloksasin ve siprofloksasin (MİK90=0.125 mg/L) ile ofloksasinin (MiK90=0.50 mg/L) yer aldığı saptanmıştır. Test edilen antibiyotikler içerisinde rifampin en yüksek MİK90 değeri göstermiş (MİK90=1.5 mg/L), sekiz izolatın rifampine orta duyarlı olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Sonuç olarak TMP- SMX ve doksisikline karşı çalışmamızda ciddi bir direnç problemi ile karşılaşılmamış, ancak tüberküloz ve bruselloz tedavisinde kullanılan rifampin için dikkatli olunması gerektiği belirlenmiştir. İleride karşılaşılabilecek direnç problemlerinden kaçınmak için, Brucella türlerinin antibiyotik duyarlılıklarının belirli aralıklarla kontrol edilmesinin gerekli olduğu kanısına varılmıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

ALIŞKAN, H. E., TURUNÇ, T., DEMİROĞLU, Y. Z., ÇOLAKOĞLU, Ş., ARSLAN, A. H. (2008). Short communication: ınvestigation of in vitro antibiotic susceptibility of brucella melitensis. Mikrobiyoloji Bülteni, Cilt: 42 - Sayı: 1, 125–129. https://ajindex.com/articles/298954

References (11)

  1. Young EJ. Brucella species, pp: 2386-931 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 Sağlık Bakanlığı 2004 Yılı Temel Sağlık Servisi İstatistik 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
  4. 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
  5. 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
  6. Pappas G, Christou L, Akritidis N, Tsianos EV. Quinolones for brucellosis: treating old diseases with new drugs. Clin Microbiol Infect 2006; 12: 823-5
  7. Ağalar 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
  8. 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
  9. Saltoglu N, Taşova Y, İnal 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
  10. 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
  11. Bayindir Y, Sönmez E, Aladag A, Buyukberber N. Comparison of five antimicrobial regimens for the treatment of brucellar spondylitis: a prosp