Literature DB >> 2808214

Comparative in-vitro activity of meropenem on clinical isolates from the United Kingdom.

A King1, C Boothman, I Phillips.   

Abstract

MICs of meropenem were determined for a wide range of common bacteria of clinical importance. For Enterobacteriaceae, Aeromonas spp., Haemophilus influenzae, Branhamella catarrhalis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Gardnerella vaginalis, Campylobacter coli/jejuni, beta-haemolytic streptococci and anaerobes other than Clostridium difficile, MICs were almost always within the range 0.002-0.5 mg/l. The activity of meropenem for these organisms was always greater than that of imipenem and piperacillin, and was similar to that of ceftazidime and cefotaxime except that strains resistant to these latter, and to piperacillin, were usually sensitive to imipenem and meropenem. Meropenem was also active against most non-fermentative Gram-negative bacilli, with MICs in the range 0.12-4 mg/l but Pseudomonas (Xanthomonas) maltophilia was often resistant, as it was to all the other drugs tested. Staphylococci, Strreptococcus pneumoniae and other alpha-haemolytic streptococci were usually more sensitive to imipenem than to meropenem, but even methicillin-resistant staphylococci were sensitive to both drugs (MICs less than 4 mg/l). Enterococci were also less sensitive to meropenem than to imipenem, and Enterococcus faecium was invariably highly resistant to all the drugs tested except ciprofloxacin, which had marginal activity. Results for Ps. maltophilia and Haem. influenzae were affected by media used for sensitivity testing.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2808214     DOI: 10.1093/jac/24.suppl_a.31

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother        ISSN: 0305-7453            Impact factor:   5.790


  8 in total

1.  In vitro activities of ertapenem (MK-0826) against recent clinical bacteria collected in Europe and Australia.

Authors:  D M Livermore; M W Carter; S Bagel; B Wiedemann; F Baquero; E Loza; H P Endtz; N van Den Braak; C J Fernandes; L Fernandes; N Frimodt-Moller; L S Rasmussen; H Giamarellou; E Giamarellos-Bourboulis; V Jarlier; J Nguyen; C E Nord; M J Struelens; C Nonhoff; J Turnidge; J Bell; R Zbinden; S Pfister; L Mixson; D L Shungu
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 2.  Enterobacter spp.: pathogens poised to flourish at the turn of the century.

Authors:  W E Sanders; C C Sanders
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 26.132

3.  Meropenem pharmacokinetics and penetration into an inflammatory exudate.

Authors:  R Wise; M Logan; M Cooper; J P Ashby; J M Andrews
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1990-08       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 4.  Future directions in antimicrobial chemotherapy.

Authors:  R Janknegt
Journal:  Pharm Weekbl Sci       Date:  1992-08-21

Review 5.  Meropenem. A review of its antibacterial activity, pharmacokinetic properties and clinical efficacy.

Authors:  L R Wiseman; A J Wagstaff; R N Brogden; H M Bryson
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 6.  Gardnerella vaginalis: characteristics, clinical considerations, and controversies.

Authors:  B W Catlin
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 26.132

7.  Activity of meropenem against imipenem-resistant bacteria and selection in vitro of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae.

Authors:  L J Piddock; H L Turner
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  1992-12       Impact factor: 3.267

8.  Characterization of Multi-Drug Resistant Enterococcus faecalis Isolated from Cephalic Recording Chambers in Research Macaques (Macaca spp.).

Authors:  Stephanie E Woods; Mia T Lieberman; Francois Lebreton; Elise Trowel; César de la Fuente-Núñez; Joanne Dzink-Fox; Michael S Gilmore; James G Fox
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-01-12       Impact factor: 3.240

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.