Literature DB >> 2958498

Quality control limits for teicoplanin susceptibility tests and confirmation of disk diffusion interpretive criteria.

A L Barry1, R N Jones, T L Gavan, C Thornsberry.   

Abstract

For monitoring the performance of teicoplanin susceptibility tests, the following quality control limits are recommended: Staphylococcus aureus ATCC 29213, MIC of 0.12 to 0.5 micrograms/ml; Enterococcus faecalis ATCC 29212, MIC of 0.06 to 0.25 micrograms/ml; and S. aureus ATCC 25923, zones 15 to 19 mm in diameter (30-micrograms disks). However, some lots of Mueller-Hinton agar provided unusually large zones of inhibition with both vancomycin and teicoplanin disks, and these lots should be excluded before routine use. Teicoplanin and vancomycin differed only in their activity against oxacillin-resistant strains of Staphylococcus haemolyticus, which had decreased susceptibility to teicoplanin but were fully susceptible to vancomycin. For tests with 30-micrograms teicoplanin disks, zones less than or equal to 10 and greater than or equal to 14 mm in diameter represent resistant and susceptible breakpoints, respectively.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1987        PMID: 2958498      PMCID: PMC269342          DOI: 10.1128/jcm.25.9.1812-1814.1987

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


  9 in total

1.  Evaluation of teicoplanin and vancomycin disk susceptibility tests.

Authors:  A L Barry; C Thornsberry; R N Jones
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1986-01       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Quality control limits for microdilution susceptibility tests with aztreonam, imipenem, ceftriaxone, ceftazidime, ceftizoxime, cefuroxime, and cefonicid.

Authors:  A L Barry; T L Gavan; R N Jones; L W Ayers; P C Fuchs; E H Gerlach; C Thornsberry
Journal:  Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  1987-05       Impact factor: 2.803

3.  Quality control limits for ampicillin, carbenicillin, mezlocillin, and piperacillin disk diffusion susceptibility tests: a collaborative study.

Authors:  T L Gavan; R N Jones; A L Barry; P C Fuchs; E H Gerlach; J M Matsen; L B Reller; C Thornsberry; L D Thrupp
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1981-07       Impact factor: 5.948

4.  In vitro activity and human pharmacokinetics of teicoplanin.

Authors:  L Verbist; B Tjandramaga; B Hendrickx; A Van Hecken; P Van Melle; R Verbesselt; J Verhaegen; P J De Schepper
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1984-12       Impact factor: 5.191

5.  In vitro activity of teichomycin A 2 in comparison with penicillin and vancomycin against gram-positive cocci.

Authors:  A Bauernfeind; C Petermüller
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1982-10       Impact factor: 3.267

6.  In vitro activity of teichomycin compared with those of other antibiotics.

Authors:  H C Neu; P Labthavikul
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1983-09       Impact factor: 5.191

7.  Comparative in vitro activities of teichomycin and other antibiotics against JK diphtheroids.

Authors:  L Jadeja; V Fainstein; B LeBlanc; G P Bodey
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1983-08       Impact factor: 5.191

8.  Teichomycin: in-vitro and in-vivo evaluation in comparison with other antibiotics.

Authors:  R Pallanza; M Berti; B P Goldstein; E Mapelli; E Randisi; R Scotti; V Arioli
Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother       Date:  1983-05       Impact factor: 5.790

9.  Clinical evaluation of teicoplanin for therapy of severe infections caused by gram-positive bacteria.

Authors:  Y Glupczynski; H Lagast; P Van der Auwera; J P Thys; F Crokaert; E Yourassowsky; F Meunier-Carpentier; J Klastersky; J P Kains; E Serruys-Schoutens
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1986-01       Impact factor: 5.191

  9 in total
  8 in total

1.  Comparison of the agar dilution, tube dilution, and broth microdilution susceptibility tests for determination of teicoplanin MICs.

Authors:  M T Kenny; J K Dulworth; M A Brackman
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1989-06       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Percentages and distributions of teicoplanin- and vancomycin-resistant strains among coagulase-negative staphylococci.

Authors:  F W Goldstein; A Coutrot; A Sieffer; J F Acar
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1990-05       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 3.  Current perspectives on glycopeptide resistance.

Authors:  N Woodford; A P Johnson; D Morrison; D C Speller
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 26.132

4.  Comparative in vitro activities of teicoplanin, vancomycin, oxacillin, and other antimicrobial agents against bacteremic isolates of gram-positive cocci.

Authors:  E A Gorzynski; D Amsterdam; T R Beam; C Rotstein
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1989-11       Impact factor: 5.191

5.  Activities of daptomycin and teicoplanin against Staphylococcus haemolyticus and Staphylococcus epidermidis, including evaluation of susceptibility testing recommendations.

Authors:  D E Low; A McGeer; R Poon
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1989-04       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 6.  Teicoplanin. A review of its antibacterial activity, pharmacokinetic properties and therapeutic potential.

Authors:  D M Campoli-Richards; R N Brogden; D Faulds
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  1990-09       Impact factor: 9.546

7.  Experience with outpatient intravenous teicoplanin therapy for chronic osteomyelitis.

Authors:  W Graninger; C Wenisch; E Wiesinger; M Menschik; J Karimi; E Presterl
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 3.267

8.  Susceptibility of Staphylococcus species and subspecies to teicoplanin.

Authors:  T L Bannerman; D L Wadiak; W E Kloos
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1991-09       Impact factor: 5.191

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.