The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2017
Activity of ceftolozane/tazobactam against surveillance and 'problem' Enterobacteriaceae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and non-fermenters from the British Isles.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Livermore David M, Mushtaq Shazad, Meunier Daniele, Hopkins Katie L, Hill Robert, Adkin Rachael, Chaudhry Aiysha, Pike Rachel, Staves Peter, Woodford Neil, BSAC Resistance Surveillance Standing Committee
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: We assessed the activity of ceftolozane/tazobactam against consecutive isolates collected in the BSAC Bacteraemia Surveillance from 2011 to 2015 and against 'problem' isolates sent to the UK national reference laboratory from July 2015, when routine testing began.
METHODS: Susceptibility testing was by BSAC agar dilution with resistance mechanisms identified by PCR and interpretive reading.
RESULTS: Data were reviewed for 6080 BSAC surveillance isolates and 5473 referred organisms. Ceftolozane/tazobactam had good activity against unselected ESBL producers in the BSAC series, but activity was reduced against ertapenem-resistant ESBL producers, which were numerous among reference submissions. AmpC-derepressed Enterobacter spp. were widely resistant, but Escherichia coli with raised chromosomal AmpC frequently remained susceptible, as did Klebsiella pneumoniae with acquired DHA-1-type AmpC. Carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae were mostly resistant, except for ceftazidime-susceptible isolates with OXA-48-like enzymes. Ceftolozane/tazobactam was active against 99.8% of the BSAC Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates; against referred P. aeruginosa it was active against 99.7% with moderately raised efflux, 94.7% with strongly raised efflux and 96.6% with derepressed AmpC. Resistance in P. aeruginosa was largely confined to isolates with metallo-β-lactamases (MBLs) or ESBLs. MICs for referred Burkholderia spp. and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia were 2-4-fold lower than those of ceftazidime.
CONCLUSIONS: Ceftolozane/tazobactam is active against ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae; gains against other problem Enterobacteriaceae groups were limited. Against P. aeruginosa it overcame the two most prevalent mechanisms (up-regulated efflux and derepressed AmpC) and was active against 51.9% of isolates non-susceptible to all other β-lactams, rising to 80.9% if ESBL and MBL producers were excluded.
METHODS: Susceptibility testing was by BSAC agar dilution with resistance mechanisms identified by PCR and interpretive reading.
RESULTS: Data were reviewed for 6080 BSAC surveillance isolates and 5473 referred organisms. Ceftolozane/tazobactam had good activity against unselected ESBL producers in the BSAC series, but activity was reduced against ertapenem-resistant ESBL producers, which were numerous among reference submissions. AmpC-derepressed Enterobacter spp. were widely resistant, but Escherichia coli with raised chromosomal AmpC frequently remained susceptible, as did Klebsiella pneumoniae with acquired DHA-1-type AmpC. Carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae were mostly resistant, except for ceftazidime-susceptible isolates with OXA-48-like enzymes. Ceftolozane/tazobactam was active against 99.8% of the BSAC Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates; against referred P. aeruginosa it was active against 99.7% with moderately raised efflux, 94.7% with strongly raised efflux and 96.6% with derepressed AmpC. Resistance in P. aeruginosa was largely confined to isolates with metallo-β-lactamases (MBLs) or ESBLs. MICs for referred Burkholderia spp. and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia were 2-4-fold lower than those of ceftazidime.
CONCLUSIONS: Ceftolozane/tazobactam is active against ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae; gains against other problem Enterobacteriaceae groups were limited. Against P. aeruginosa it overcame the two most prevalent mechanisms (up-regulated efflux and derepressed AmpC) and was active against 51.9% of isolates non-susceptible to all other β-lactams, rising to 80.9% if ESBL and MBL producers were excluded.