Literature DB >> 7985998

Teicoplanin alone or combined with rifampin compared with vancomycin for prophylaxis and treatment of experimental foreign body infection by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

H J Schaad1, C Chuard, P Vaudaux, F A Waldvogel, D P Lew.   

Abstract

The prophylactic and therapeutic activities of teicoplanin were evaluated in two different experimental models of foreign body infections caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). In a guinea pig model of prophylaxis, subcutaneously implanted tissue cages were infected at a > 90% rate by 10(2) CFU of MRSA in control animals. A single dose of 30 mg of teicoplanin per kg of body weight administered intraperitoneally 6 h before bacterial challenge was as effective as vancomycin in preventing experimental infection in tissue cages injected with either 10(2), 10(3), or 10(4) CFU of MRSA. In a rat model evaluating the therapy of chronic tissue cage infection caused by MRSA, the efficacy of a 7-day high-dose (30 mg/kg once daily) regimen of teicoplanin was compared with that of vancomycin (50 mg/kg twice daily). Whereas high levels of teicoplanin were found in tissue cage fluid, continuously exceeding its MBC for MRSA by 8- to 16-fold, no significant reduction in the viable counts of MRSA occurred during therapy. In contrast, either vancomycin alone or a combined regimen of high-dose teicoplanin plus rifampin (25 mg/kg twice daily) could significantly decrease the viable counts in tissue cage fluids. Whereas the bacteria recovered from tissue cage fluids during therapy showed no evidence of teicoplanin resistance, they failed to be killed even by high levels of this antimicrobial agent. The altered susceptibility of in vivo growing bacteria to teicoplanin killing might in part explain the defective activity of this antimicrobial agent when used as monotherapy against chronic S. aureus infections. These data may indicate the need for a combined regimen of teicoplanin with other agents such as rifampin to optimize the therapy of severe staphylococcal infections.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1994        PMID: 7985998      PMCID: PMC284625          DOI: 10.1128/AAC.38.8.1703

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother        ISSN: 0066-4804            Impact factor:   5.191


  50 in total

1.  Antistaphylococcal activities of teicoplanin and vancomycin in vitro and in an experimental infection.

Authors:  W E Peetermans; J J Hoogeterp; A M Hazekamp-van Dokkum; P van den Broek; H Mattie
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1990-10       Impact factor: 5.191

2.  Teicoplanin compared with vancomycin in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections: preliminary results.

Authors:  Y Van Laethem; P Hermans; S De Wit; H Goosens; N Clumeck
Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother       Date:  1988-01       Impact factor: 5.790

3.  Treatment of experimental foreign body infection caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

Authors:  J C Lucet; M Herrmann; P Rohner; R Auckenthaler; F A Waldvogel; D P Lew
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 5.191

4.  Treatment of bone, joint, and vascular-access-associated gram-positive bacterial infections with teicoplanin.

Authors:  R N Greenberg
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 5.  Resistance to vancomycin and teicoplanin: an emerging clinical problem.

Authors:  A P Johnson; A H Uttley; N Woodford; R C George
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  1990-07       Impact factor: 26.132

6.  Resistance of Staphylococcus aureus recovered from infected foreign body in vivo to killing by antimicrobials.

Authors:  C Chuard; J C Lucet; P Rohner; M Herrmann; R Auckenthaler; F A Waldvogel; D P Lew
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  1991-06       Impact factor: 5.226

7.  Failure of treatment with teicoplanin at 6 milligrams/kilogram/day in patients with Staphylococcus aureus intravascular infection. The Infectious Diseases Consortium of Oregon.

Authors:  D N Gilbert; C A Wood; R C Kimbrough
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1991-01       Impact factor: 5.191

8.  Randomized study of vancomycin versus teicoplanin for the treatment of gram-positive bacterial infections in immunocompromised hosts.

Authors:  P Van der Auwera; M Aoun; F Meunier
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1991-03       Impact factor: 5.191

9.  Teicoplanin monotherapy of serious infections caused by gram-positive bacteria: a re-evaluation of patients with endocarditis or Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia from a European open trial.

Authors:  P G Davey; A H Williams
Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother       Date:  1991-04       Impact factor: 5.790

10.  Daptomycin compared with teicoplanin and vancomycin for therapy of experimental Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis.

Authors:  G W Kaatz; S M Seo; V N Reddy; E M Bailey; M J Rybak
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1990-11       Impact factor: 5.191

View more
  12 in total

1.  Treatment with linezolid or vancomycin in combination with rifampin is effective in an animal model of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus foreign body osteomyelitis.

Authors:  Paschalis Vergidis; Mark S Rouse; Gorane Euba; Melissa J Karau; Suzannah M Schmidt; Jayawant N Mandrekar; James M Steckelberg; Robin Patel
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2010-12-28       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 2.  Infections associated with medical devices: pathogenesis, management and prophylaxis.

Authors:  Christof von Eiff; Bernd Jansen; Wolfgang Kohnen; Karsten Becker
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 9.546

3.  Intensive therapy with ceftobiprole medocaril of experimental foreign-body infection by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

Authors:  Pierre Vaudaux; Asllan Gjinovci; Manuela Bento; Dongmei Li; Jacques Schrenzel; Daniel P Lew
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 5.191

4.  Successful single-dose teicoplanin prophylaxis against experimental streptococcal, enterococcal, and staphylococcal aortic valve endocarditis.

Authors:  G S Perdikaris; A Pefanis; H Giamarellou; A Nikolopoulos; E P Margaris; I Donta; A Tsitsika; P Karayiannakos
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 5.191

5.  Comparison of levofloxacin, alatrofloxacin, and vancomycin for prophylaxis and treatment of experimental foreign-body-associated infection by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

Authors:  Pierre Vaudaux; Patrice Francois; Carmelo Bisognano; Jacques Schrenzel; Daniel P Lew
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 5.191

6.  Modulation of fibronectin adhesins and other virulence factors in a teicoplanin-resistant derivative of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

Authors:  Adriana Renzoni; Patrice Francois; Dongmei Li; William L Kelley; Daniel P Lew; Pierre Vaudaux; Jacques Schrenzel
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 5.191

7.  Prevalence of isolates with reduced glycopeptide susceptibility in orthopedic device-related infections due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

Authors:  P Vaudaux; T Ferry; I Uçkay; P François; J Schrenzel; S Harbarth; A Renzoni
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2012-07-26       Impact factor: 3.267

8.  Comparison of tigecycline and vancomycin for treatment of experimental foreign-body infection due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

Authors:  Pierre Vaudaux; Bénédicte Fleury; Asllan Gjinovci; Elzbieta Huggler; Manuela Tangomo-Bento; Daniel P Lew
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2009-04-13       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 9.  The guinea pig as a model of infectious diseases.

Authors:  Danielle J Padilla-Carlin; David N McMurray; Anthony J Hickey
Journal:  Comp Med       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 0.982

10.  Comparison of sparfloxacin, temafloxacin, and ciprofloxacin for prophylaxis and treatment of experimental foreign-body infection by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

Authors:  A Cagni; C Chuard; P E Vaudaux; J Schrenzel; D P Lew
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 5.191

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.