Literature DB >> 16002183

Antimicrobial susceptibility of polymerase chain reaction ribotypes of Clostridium difficile commonly isolated from symptomatic hospital patients in the UK.

R John1, J S Brazier.   

Abstract

Two hundred and seventy-one clinical isolates of Clostridium difficile, including the six most common polymerase chain reaction (PCR) ribotypes isolated from symptomatic patients in UK hospitals, were tested against nine antibiotics (imipenem, erythromycin, levofloxacin, piperacillin/tazobactam, ciprofloxacin, co-amoxiclav, cefotaxime, amoxicillin and clindamycin). All 271 strains were susceptible to co-amoxiclav, piperacillin/tazobactam and amoxicillin, and resistant to cefotaxime and ciprofloxacin. Variable degrees of resistance were found to imipenem, erythromycin, levofloxacin and clindamycin. Significantly greater resistance to erythromycin, levofloxacin and imipenem was found in virtually all members of the two most common PCR ribotypes, 001 and 106. Resistance to these agents may have played a part in their selection as the most common strains of C. difficile found in UK hospitals.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16002183     DOI: 10.1016/j.jhin.2005.01.020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Hosp Infect        ISSN: 0195-6701            Impact factor:   3.926


  9 in total

1.  In vitro susceptibility of Clostridium difficile clinical isolates from a multi-institutional outbreak in Southern Québec, Canada.

Authors:  Anne-Marie Bourgault; François Lamothe; Vivian G Loo; Louise Poirier
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 5.191

2.  Sensitivity to antibiotics of Clostridium difficile toxigenic nosocomial strains.

Authors:  Vladimir Beran; Dittmar Chmelar; Jana Vobejdova; Adela Konigova; Jakub Nemec; Josef Tvrdik
Journal:  Folia Microbiol (Praha)       Date:  2013-10-11       Impact factor: 2.099

3.  Clostridioides difficile ribotype 106: A systematic review of the antimicrobial susceptibility, genetics, and clinical outcomes of this common worldwide strain.

Authors:  T J Carlson; D Blasingame; A J Gonzales-Luna; F Alnezary; K W Garey
Journal:  Anaerobe       Date:  2019-12-19       Impact factor: 3.331

4.  Investigation of toxin gene diversity and antimicrobial resistance of Clostridium difficile strains.

Authors:  Shanshan Zhu; Huaping Zhang; Xinsheng Zhang; Chao Wang; Guangming Fan; Weifeng Zhang; Gang Sun; Huihong Chen; Liming Zhang; Zhaoyun Li
Journal:  Biomed Rep       Date:  2014-07-08

5.  Array comparative hybridisation reveals a high degree of similarity between UK and European clinical isolates of hypervirulent Clostridium difficile.

Authors:  Gemma L Marsden; Ian J Davis; Victoria J Wright; Mohammed Sebaihia; Ed J Kuijper; Nigel P Minton
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2010-06-21       Impact factor: 3.969

6.  Clostridium difficile ribotype 027, toxinotype III, the Netherlands.

Authors:  Ed J Kuijper; Renate J van den Berg; Sylvia Debast; Caroline E Visser; Dick Veenendaal; Annet Troelstra; Tjallie van der Kooi; Susan van den Hof; Daan W Notermans
Journal:  Emerg Infect Dis       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 6.883

7.  Erythromycin for prokinesis: imprudent prescribing?

Authors:  Martino Dall'Antonia; Mark Wilks; Pietro G Coen; Susan Bragman; Michael R Millar
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 9.097

8.  Clostridium difficile in ready-to-eat salads, Scotland.

Authors:  Marwah M Bakri; Derek J Brown; John P Butcher; Alistair D Sutherland
Journal:  Emerg Infect Dis       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 6.883

9.  Antimicrobial susceptibility of clostridium difficile clinical isolates in iran.

Authors:  Mehdi Goudarzi; Hossein Goudarzi; Masoud Alebouyeh; Masoumeh Azimi Rad; Farahnaz Sadat Shayegan Mehr; Mohammad Reza Zali; Mohammad Mehdi Aslani
Journal:  Iran Red Crescent Med J       Date:  2013-08-05       Impact factor: 0.611

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.