SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Mikrobiyoloji Bülteni / 2011 / Cilt: 45 - Sayı: 4

Evaluation of vancomycin, teicoplanin, linezolide and tigecycline susceptibilities of nosocomial methicillin-resistant staphylococcus strains by E-test

Hastane kaynaklı metisiline dirençli stafilokok suşlarında vankomisin, teikoplanin, linezolid ve tigesiklin duyarlılığının E-test yöntemiyle değerlendirilmesi

Tamer Sami PELİTLİ
Salih CESUR
Sami KINIKLI
Hasan IRMAK
Ali Pekcan DEMİRÖZ
Esra KARAKOÇ
Pages
758–761
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)

Among glycopeptides, MIC50 and MIC90 values of vancomycin were found to be lower than that of teicoplanin.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of this study was to determine the minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) values of vancomycin, teicoplanin, tigecycline and linezolid in 100 methicillin-resistant staphylococci [21 methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and 79 methicillin-resistant coagulase negative staphylococcus (MR-CNS)] isolated as agents of nosocomial infection from patients at Ankara Training and Research Hospital between June 2005-March 2007.
📊
Key Findings & Data:For 21 MRSA strains $MIC _{50}, and MIC _{90}$ values were as follows: vancomycin 0.125 μg/ml and 1 μg/ml; teicoplanin 0.5 μg/ml and 3 μg/ml, linezolid 0.047 μg/ml and 0.19 μg/ml; tigecycline 0.094 μg/ml and 0.5 μg/ml, respectively.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Among glycopeptides, MIC50 and MIC90 values of vancomycin were found to be lower than that of teicoplanin.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2005 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine the minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) values of vancomycin, teicoplanin, tigecycline and linezolid in 100 methicillin-resistant staphylococci [21 methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and 79 methicillin-resistant coagulase negative staphylococcus (MR-CNS)] isolated as agents of nosocomial infection from patients at Ankara Training and Research Hospital between June 2005-March 2007. The MIC values for vancomycin, teicoplanin, linezolid and tigecycline were tested by E-test method (AB Biodisk, Sweden). For 21 MRSA strains $MIC _{50}, and MIC _{90}$ values were as follows: vancomycin 0.125 μg/ml and 1 μg/ml; teicoplanin 0.5 μg/ml and 3 μg/ml, linezolid 0.047 μg/ml and 0.19 μg/ml; tigecycline 0.094 μg/ml and 0.5 μg/ml, respectively. For 79 MR-CNS strains $MIC _{50}, and MIC _{90}$ values were as follows: vancomycin 0.5 μg/ml and 2 μg/ml; teicoplanin 2 μg/ml and 4 μg/ml; linezolid 0.125 μg/ml and 0.25 μg/ml; tigecycline 0.38 μg/ml and 0.5 μg/ml, respectively. No resistance to vancomycin, teicoplanin, tigecycline and linezolid were determined in methicillin-resistant staphylococcus strains isolated from the inpatients in our hospital. Among glycopeptides, MIC50 and MIC90 values of vancomycin were found to be lower than that of teicoplanin.

🔖

Cite This Article

PELİTLİ, T. S., CESUR, S., KINIKLI, S., IRMAK, H., DEMİRÖZ, A. P., KARAKOÇ, E. (2011). Evaluation of vancomycin, teicoplanin, linezolide and tigecycline susceptibilities of nosocomial methicillin-resistant staphylococcus strains by E-test. Mikrobiyoloji Bülteni, Cilt: 45 - Sayı: 4, 758–761. https://ajindex.com/articles/299600

References (12)

  1. Waldvogel FA. Staphylococcus aureus (including staphylococcal toxic shock), pp: 2069-99. In: Mandell GL, Bennett JE, Dolin R (eds), Principles and Practice of Infectious Diseases. 2000, 5th ed. Churchill Livingstone, Philadelphia
  2. Lowy FD. Staphylococcus aureus infection. N Engl J Med 1998; 339(8): 520-32
  3. Abb J. In vitro activity of linezolide, quinupristin-dalfopristin, vancomycin, teicoplanin, moxifloxacin and mupirocin against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus comparative evaluation by the E-test and a broth microdilution method. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2002; 43(4): 319-21
  4. Denis O, Deplano A, Nonhoff C. In-vitro activities of ceftobiprole, tigecycline, daptomycin, and 19 other antimicrobials against methicillin-resistant S.aureus strains from a National Survey of Belgian Hospitals. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2006; 50(8): 2680-5
  5. Souli M, Kontogidou E, Antoniadou A. In vitro activity of tigecycline against multiple-drug-resistant, including pan-resistant, gram-negative and gram-positive clinical isolates from Greek Hospitals. J Antimicrob Chemother 2007; 59(4): 786-90
  6. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (Çeviri ed. Gür D). Antimikrobik duyarlılık testleri için uygulama standartları. On sekizinci bilgi eki, M100-S18. 2008, Bilimsel Tıp Yayınevi, Ankara
  7. Hiramatsu K, Aritaka N, Hanaki H, et al. Dissemination in Japanese hospitals of strains of Staphylococcus aureus heterogenously resistant to vancomycin. Lancet 1997; 350(9092): 1670-3
  8. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Staphylococcus aureus with reduced susceptibility to vancomycin in United States 1997. MMWR 1997; 46(33): 765-6
  9. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Staphylococcus aureus resistant to vancomycin in United States. MMWR 2002; 51(26): 565-7
  10. Küçükateş E, Kocazeybek B, Çakan H ve ark. Dört farklı merkezin cerrahi yoğun bakım ünitesi hastalarından izole edilen stafilokok kökenlerinin vankomisin ve teikoplanine in vitro etkinliğinin mikrodilüsyon yöntemi ile araştırılması. İnfeksiyon Derg 2002; 16(4): 325-7
  11. Sünbül M, Eroğlu C, Çınar T, Saniç A, Leblecioğlu H. Stafilokok suşlarının vankomisin ve teikoplanine duyarlılıkları. ANKEM 1998; 12(1): 77-80
  12. Güriz H, Çiftçi E, Aysev AD. Metisiline dirençli ve metisiline duyarlı S.aureus suşlarının vankomisin ve teikoplanin için minimal inhibitör konsantrasyonlarının araştırılması. XI. Türk Klinik Mikrobiyoloji ve İnfeksiyon Hastalıkları Kongresi. 30 Mart- 3 Nisan 2003, İstanb