Journal of global antimicrobial resistance · 2019
In vitro activity of ceftolozane-tazobactam and ceftazidime-avibactam against clinical isolates of meropenem-non-susceptible Pseudomonas aeruginosa: A two-centre study.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Mirza Hasan Cenk, Hortaç Elvan, Koçak Aylin Altay, Demirkaya M Hamiyet, Yayla Buket, Güçlü Aylin Üsküdar, Başustaoğlu Ahmet
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare the activity of ceftazidime-avibactam (C/A), ceftolozane-tazobactam (C/T) and three anti-pseudomonal β-lactams (piperacillin-tazobactam, ceftazidime and cefepime) against a collection of meropenem-non-susceptible Pseudomonas aeruginosa (P. aeruginosa) clinical isolates recovered from two centres in Turkey.
METHODS: A total of 102 unique patient isolates of meropenem-non-susceptible P. aeruginosa were included in the study. MICs of antimicrobials were determined by the gradient diffusion method.
RESULTS: Overall susceptibility rates for C/A and C/T were 83.3% and 82.4%, respectively. Both C/A and C/T had better activity than any one of the three anti-pseudomonal β-lactams. According to the MIC50 values, C/T was the most potent agent against isolates. Although the susceptibility rates of isolates to C/T and C/A were similar, C/T (MIC50, 1 μg/mL) was four-fold more potent than C/A (MIC50, 4 μg/mL). The MIC50 values of C/A and C/T for the isolates that were non-susceptible to three β-lactams were significantly higher than those for isolates that were non-susceptible to zero, one or two β-lactams. Also, the C/A MIC50 value for the isolates that were non-susceptible to two β-lactams was higher than that for isolates which were non-susceptible to one β-lactam.
CONCLUSIONS: C/A and C/T showed good activity against meropenem-non-susceptible P. aeruginosa isolates. However, resistance to these agents was not uncommon among these isolates. The overall β-lactam susceptibility profile of isolates seems to have an effect on the probability of susceptibility to C/A and C/T. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing should be performed for C/A and C/T if these agents are considered for treatment of infections caused by meropenem-non-susceptible P. aeruginosa.
METHODS: A total of 102 unique patient isolates of meropenem-non-susceptible P. aeruginosa were included in the study. MICs of antimicrobials were determined by the gradient diffusion method.
RESULTS: Overall susceptibility rates for C/A and C/T were 83.3% and 82.4%, respectively. Both C/A and C/T had better activity than any one of the three anti-pseudomonal β-lactams. According to the MIC50 values, C/T was the most potent agent against isolates. Although the susceptibility rates of isolates to C/T and C/A were similar, C/T (MIC50, 1 μg/mL) was four-fold more potent than C/A (MIC50, 4 μg/mL). The MIC50 values of C/A and C/T for the isolates that were non-susceptible to three β-lactams were significantly higher than those for isolates that were non-susceptible to zero, one or two β-lactams. Also, the C/A MIC50 value for the isolates that were non-susceptible to two β-lactams was higher than that for isolates which were non-susceptible to one β-lactam.
CONCLUSIONS: C/A and C/T showed good activity against meropenem-non-susceptible P. aeruginosa isolates. However, resistance to these agents was not uncommon among these isolates. The overall β-lactam susceptibility profile of isolates seems to have an effect on the probability of susceptibility to C/A and C/T. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing should be performed for C/A and C/T if these agents are considered for treatment of infections caused by meropenem-non-susceptible P. aeruginosa.