1887

Abstract

Ertapenem and piperacillin/tazobactam are -lactam antibiotics with a broad spectrum of activity used for the treatment of mixed infections in which and play an important aetiological role. In this study, the activities of piperacillin/tazobactam and ertapenem (MIC and time–kill kinetics) against these bacteria were compared. MICs were determined by the agar dilution method, and the time and slope of time–kill curves were analysed. In the pharmacodynamic assays, pure and mixed cultures of and were exposed to peak concentrations of ertapenem (8.0 μg ml) and piperacillin/tazobactam (64.0/8.0 μg ml) for 48 h. Treatment with ertapenem reduced the viability of and/or by 3 logs in all experiments, whereas piperacillin/tazobactam only affected the viability of . Both drugs exhibited their fastest rates of killing when bacteria were grown in mixed cultures. According to the results, ertapenem exhibited activity similar to that of piperacillin/tazobactam against alone or in mixed culture. However, ertapenem exhibited a markedly higher activity against alone or in combination with relative to piperacillin/tazobactam.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.47112-0
2007-06-01
2019-11-20
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jmm/56/6/798.html?itemId=/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.47112-0&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Betriu, C., Salso, S., Sanchez, A., Culebras, E., Gómez, M., Rodriguez-Avial, I. & Picazo, J. J. ( 2006; ). Comparative in vitro activity and the inoculum effect of ertapenem against Enterobacteriaceae resistant to extended-spectrum cephalosporins. Int J Antimicrob Agents 28, 1–5.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Craig, W. A., Bhavnani, S. M. & Ambrose, P. G. ( 2004; ). The inoculum effect: fact or artifact?. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 50, 229–230.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Dela Pena, A. S., Asperger, W., Kockerling, F., Raz, R., Kafka, R., Warren, B., Shivaprakash, M., Vrijens, F., Giezek, H. & other authors ( 2006; ). Efficacy and safety of ertapenem versus piperacillin-tazobactam for the treatment of intra-abdominal infections requiring surgical intervention. Optimizing Intra-Abdominal Surgery with Invanz (OASIS)-I Study Group. J Gastrointest Surg 10, 567–574.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Goldstein, E. J. C. & Snydman, D. R. ( 2004; ). Intra-abdominal infections: review of the bacteriology, antimicrobial susceptibility and the role of ertapenem in their therapy. J Antimicrob Chemother 53, (Suppl. 2), ii29–ii36.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Goldstein, E. J. C., Citron, D. M., Merriam, C. V., Warren, Y. & Tyrrell, K. L. ( 2000; ). Comparative in vitro activities of ertapenem (MK-0826) against 1001 anaerobes isolated from human intra-abdominal infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 44, 2389–2394.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Heilmann, F. ( 1993; ). Ampicillin and ampicillin-sulbactam dilution tests with mixed cultures of Bacteroides fragilis, Escherichia coli and Enterococcus. Infection 21, 187–190.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Hermsen, E. D., Hovde, I. B., Sprandel, K. A., Rodvold, K. A. & Rotschafer, J. C. ( 2005; ). Levofloxacin plus metronidazole administered once daily versus moxifloxacin monotherapy against a mixed infection of Escherichia coli and Bacteroides fragilis in an in vitro pharmacodynamic model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 49, 685–689.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Jerman, B., Butala, M. & Žgur-Bertok, D. ( 2005; ). Sublethal concentrations of ciprofloxacin induce bacteriocin synthesis in Escherichia coli. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 49, 3087–3090.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Klepser, M. E., Banevicius, M. A., Quintiliani, R. & Nightingale, C. H. ( 1996; ). Characterization of bactericidal activity of clindamycin against Bacteroides fragilis via kill curve methods. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 40, 1941–1944.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. König, C., Simmen, H. P. & Blaser, J. ( 1998; ). Bacterial concentrations in pus and infected peritoneal fluid – implications for bactericidal activity of antibiotics. J Antimicrob Chemother 42, 227–232.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Muñoz Bellido, J. L., Muñoz Criado, S., García García, I., Alonso Manzanares, M. A., Gutiérrez Zufiaurre, M. N. & García-Rodrigues, J. A. ( 1997; ). In vitro activities of β-lactam-β-lactamase inhibitor combinations against Stenotrophomonas maltophilia: correlation between methods for testing inhibitory activity, time-kill curves, and bactericidal activity. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 41, 2612–2615.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. NCCLS ( 2003; ). Methods for Dilution Antimicrobial Susceptibility Tests for Bacteria that Grow Aerobically, 6th edn. Approved Standard. NCCLS document M7-A6. Wayne, PA: National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards.
  13. NCCLS ( 2004; ). Methods for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing for Anaerobic Bacteria, 6th edn. Approved Standard. NCCLS publication M11-A6. Wayne, PA: National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards.
  14. Pendland, S. L., Jung, R., Messick, C. R., Schriever, C. A. & Patka, J. ( 2002; ). In vitro bactericidal activity of piperacillin, gentamicin, and metronidazole in a mixed model containing Escherichia coli, Enterococcus faecalis, and Bacteroides fragilis. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 43, 149–156.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Perry, C. M. & Markham, A. ( 1999; ). Piperacillin/tazobactam: an updated review of its use in the treatment of bacterial infections. Drugs 57, 805–843.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Sader, H. S., Ferreira, A. T., Tosin, I. I., Gales, A. C., Keim, L. S., Carbadillo, J. M., Mello, S. J., Jr & Tavares, W. ( 1998; ). Piperacillin/tazobactam: evaluation of its in vitro activity against bacteria isolated in two Brazilian hospitals and an overview of its antibacterial activity, pharmacokinetic properties and therapeutic potential. Braz J Infect Dis 2, 241–255.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Schaumann, R., Goldstein, E. J., Forberg, J. & Rodloff, A. C. ( 2005; ). Activity of moxifloxacin against Bacteroides fragilis and Escherichia coli in an in vitro pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model employing pure and mixed cultures. J Med Microbiol 54, 749–753.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Solomkin, J. S. & Konstantin, U. ( 2003; ). Intraabdominal sepsis: newer interventional and antimicrobial therapies for infected necrotizing pancreatitis. Curr Opin Crit Care 9, 424–427.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Solomkin, J. S., Yellin, A. E., Rotstein, O. D., Christou, N. V., Dellinger, E. P., Tellado, J. M., Malafaia, O., Fernandez, A., Choe, K. A. & other authors ( 2003; ). Ertapenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam in the treatment of complicated intraabdominal infections: results of a double-blind, randomized comparative phase III trial. Protocol 017 Study Group. Ann Surg 237, 235–245.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Soriano, F., Garcia-Corbeira, P., Ponte, C., Fernandez-Roblas, R. & Gadea, I. ( 1996; ). Correlation of pharmacodynamic parameters of five β-lactam antibiotics with therapeutic efficacies in an animal model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 40, 2686–2690.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Spangler, S. K., Jacobs, M. R. & Appelbaum, P. C. ( 1997; ). Bactericidal activity of DU-6859a compared to activities of three quinolones, three β-lactams, clindamycin, and metronidazole against anaerobes as determined by time-kill methodology. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 41, 847–849.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Stearne, L. E., Kooi, C., Goessens, W. H., Bakker-Woudenberg, I. A. & Gyssens, I. C. ( 2001; ). In vitro activity of trovafloxacin against Bacteroides fragilis in mixed culture with either Escherichia coli or a vancomycin-resistant strain of Enterococcus faecium determined by an anaerobic time-kill technique. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 45, 243–251.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Thomson, K. S. & Moland, E. S. ( 2001; ). Cefepime, piperacillin-tazobactam, and the inoculum effect in tests with extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 45, 3548–3554.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Wexler, H. M. ( 2004; ). In vitro activity of ertapenem: review of recent studies. J Antimicrob Chemother 53, ii11–ii21.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.47112-0
Loading
/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.47112-0
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error