Literature DB >> 1629320

Investigation of ampicillin-intermediate strains of Haemophilus influenzae by using the disk diffusion procedure and current National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards guidelines.

J S Heelan1, D Chesney, G Guadagno.   

Abstract

It was noted in our laboratory that certain strains of Haemophilus influenzae yielded zone sizes interpreted as resistant to the ampicillin (AMP) disk on chocolate-Mueller-Hinton agar (CMH) but showed no evidence of beta-lactamase (beta-Lac) activity. Although it is known that a second mechanism of AMP resistance exists, strains with this mechanism are uncommon. To investigate this apparent discrepancy, a study of 100 consecutive clinical isolates of H. influenzae collected over a 6-month period was performed. Isolates were simultaneously tested against five antibiotics (AMP, chloramphenicol, cefotaxime, ciprofloxacin, and AMP-sulbactam) on CMH and on two brands of Haemophilus test medium (HTM) by using the disk diffusion procedure and National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS) standards. By using CMH and NCCLS standard M2-A3-S2, strains of H. influenzae showing zone sizes of greater than or equal to 20 mm with AMP were considered sensitive. By using HTM and NCCLS standard M2-A4, strains showing zone sizes of greater than or equal to 25 mm to AMP on HTM were considered sensitive. Intermediate strains had zone sizes of 22 to 24 mm. The majority of isolates (68%) were sensitive to all antibiotics. Two percent of the isolates were resistant to chloramphenicol. Seventeen percent of the isolates were AMP-resistant, beta-Lac-producing strains of H. influenzae. Thirteen percent of the isolates gave at least one intermediate or resistant zone for AMP but were beta-Lac negative. MIC determinations with NCCLS standard M7-A2 were performed with resistant and intermediate strains. MICs for beta-Lac-producing strains of H. influenzae were >/= 8.0 microgram/ml. MICs for beta-Lac-negative strains were </= 1.0 microgram/ml and were highly reproducible. If one uses the current NCCLS zone diameter interpretive criteria, results should be viewed with caution. Further investigation of zone size interpretive criteria is warranted. It is suggested that in the case of serious infections with H. influenzae, beta-Lac-negative, AMP-resistant or -intermediate strains be confirmed by the MIC procedure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1629320      PMCID: PMC265362          DOI: 10.1128/jcm.30.7.1674-1677.1992

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Microbiol        ISSN: 0095-1137            Impact factor:   5.948


  12 in total

1.  In vitro susceptibility of Haemophilus influenzae to eight antibiotics.

Authors:  R C Gordon; T R Thompson; L I Stevens; W H Carlson
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1974-07       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 2.  Haemophilus influenzae: antibiotic susceptibility.

Authors:  C A Needham
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  1988-04       Impact factor: 26.132

3.  Evaluation of the capillary beta-lactamase test and antimicrobial susceptibility of Haemophilus influenzae.

Authors:  C Watanakunakorn; C Glotzbecker
Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol       Date:  1977-09       Impact factor: 2.493

4.  Susceptibility of multiply resistant Haemophilus influenzae to newer antimicrobial agents.

Authors:  J H Jorgensen; G V Doern; C Thornsberry; D A Preston; J S Redding; L A Maher; T Tubert
Journal:  Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  1988-01       Impact factor: 2.803

5.  Evaluation of Hemophilus type B systemic isolates for beta-lactamase and non-beta-lactamase mediated ampicillin resistance and for susceptibility to other antimicrobial agents.

Authors:  B F Woolfrey; R T Lally; M N Ederer
Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol       Date:  1987-09       Impact factor: 2.493

6.  Limited in vitro activity of cefamandole against 100 beta-lactamase- and non-beta-lactamase-producing Haemophilus influenzae strains: comparison of moxalactam, chloramphenicol, and ampicillin.

Authors:  M G Bergeron; S Claveau; P Simard
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1981-01       Impact factor: 5.191

7.  Improved medium for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Haemophilus influenzae.

Authors:  J H Jorgensen; J S Redding; L A Maher; A W Howell
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1987-11       Impact factor: 5.948

8.  Ampicillin disk diffusion susceptibility testing of Haemophilus influenzae.

Authors:  G V Doern; G S Daum; T A Tubert
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1987-09       Impact factor: 5.948

9.  Susceptibility of Haemophilus influenzae to amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, erythromycin, cefaclor, and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole.

Authors:  G V Doern; K C Chapin
Journal:  Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  1986-01       Impact factor: 2.803

10.  National collaborative study of the prevalence of antimicrobial resistance among clinical isolates of Haemophilus influenzae.

Authors:  G V Doern; J H Jorgensen; C Thornsberry; D A Preston; T Tubert; J S Redding; L A Maher
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1988-02       Impact factor: 5.191

View more
  10 in total

Review 1.  In vitro susceptibility testing of Haemophilus influenzae: review of new National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards recommendations.

Authors:  G V Doern
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1992-12       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Comparison of in-house and commercially prepared haemophilus test media for disk diffusion testing of ampicillin against Haemophilus species.

Authors:  R R Laue; P C Kohner; F R Cockerill
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  Interpretive criteria for susceptibilities of Haemophilus influenzae to ampicillin, amoxicillin, and amoxicillin-clavulanic acid.

Authors:  P C Fuchs; A L Barry
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1994-11       Impact factor: 5.948

4.  Comparison of agar dilution, broth dilution, and disk diffusion testing of ampicillin against Haemophilus species by using in-house and commercially prepared media.

Authors:  P C Kohner; J E Rosenblatt; F R Cockerill
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1994-06       Impact factor: 5.948

5.  Surveillance of susceptibility testing methodologies for Haemophilus influenzae in Canada, including evaluation of disk diffusion test.

Authors:  S R Scriver; D J Hoban; A McGeer; T C Moore; S L Walmsley; D E Low
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1994-08       Impact factor: 5.948

6.  Reevaluation of interpretive criteria for Haemophilus influenzae by using meropenem (10-microgram), imipenem (10-microgram), and ampicillin (2- and 10-microgram) disks.

Authors:  L Zerva; D J Biedenbach; R N Jones
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 5.948

7.  Susceptibilities of beta-lactamase-producing and -nonproducing ampicillin-resistant strains of Haemophilus influenzae to ceftibuten, cefaclor, cefuroxime, cefixime, cefotaxime, and amoxicillin-clavulanic acid.

Authors:  A L Barry; P C Fuchs; M A Pfaller
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 5.191

8.  Low beta-lactamase-negative ampicillin-resistant Haemophilus influenzae strains are best detected by testing amoxicillin susceptibility by the broth microdilution method.

Authors:  Silvia García-Cobos; José Campos; Federico Román; Cristina Carrera; María Pérez-Vázquez; Belén Aracil; Jesús Oteo
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2008-04-28       Impact factor: 5.191

9.  Disk diffusion versus broth microdilution susceptibility testing of Haemophilus species and Moraxella catarrhalis using seven oral antimicrobial agents: application of updated susceptibility guidelines of the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards.

Authors:  P C Kibsey; R P Rennie; J E Rushton
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1994-11       Impact factor: 5.948

10.  Molecular epidemiology of ampicillin-resistant non-beta-lactamase-producing Haemophilus influenzae.

Authors:  L Gazagne; C Delmas; E Bingen; H Dabernat
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 5.948

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.