Watanabe A, Tokue Y, Takahashi H, Kikuchi T, Kobayashi T, Gomi K, Fujimura S, Yasui S, Murayama Y, Nukiwa T. Comparative in-vitro activity of carbapenem antibiotics against respiratory pathogens isolated between 1999 and 2000.
J Infect Chemother 2001;
7:267-71. [PMID:
11810597 DOI:
10.1007/s101560170026]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/08/2001] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
We investigated the antibacterial activity of 12 antibiotics, inclusive of four carbapenems, against 167 strains of respiratory pathogens isolated between 1999 and 2000. Thirty strains of methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA), 28 strains of methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA), 11 strains of penicillin-susceptible Streptococcus pneumoniae (PSSP), 29 strains of penicillin-resistant S. pneumoniae (PRSP), 30 strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa, 14 strains of Moraxella catarrhalis, and 25 strains of Haemophilus influenzae were examined. The minimum inhibitory concentration (MICs)50/90 (microg/ml) of imipenem, panipenem, meropenem, and biapenem against the clinical isolates obtained between 1999 and 2000 were: 0.06/0.25, 0.12/0.25, 0.12/0.25, and 0.12/0.25, respectively, against MSSA; 16/32, 16/32, 16/32, and 8/32 against MRSA; < or = 0.015/0.06, < or = 0.015/0.03, 0.03/0.12, and < or = 0.015/0.06 against PSSP; 0.12/0.25, 0.03/0.06, 0.25/0.5, and 0.12/0.25 against PRSP; 1/8, 2/8, 0.5/2, and 2/16 against P. aeruginosa; 0.06/0.06, 0.03/0.06, < or = 0.015/0.06, and 0.06/0.12 against M. catarrhalis; and 1/4, 1/4, 0.12/0.25, and 2/4 against H. influenzae. A comparison of the antibacterial activity of the four carbapenems with that found in our previous studies showed no significant difference in the susceptibility of clinical isolates, except for a slight decrease in the susceptibility of MSSA. Carbapenems have remained effective for severe infections. The MIC data showed that imipenem and panipenem were more active than meropenem and biapenem against gram-positive bacteria, and that meropenem and biapenem were more active than imipenem and panipenem against gram-negative bacteria. As only meropenem had an MIC90 below the breakpoint of pneumonia against all species except MRSA, meropenem was considered to be the most potent of the four carbapenems studied.
Collapse