Clinical Isolates of Streptococcus pneumoniae with Different Susceptibilities to Ceftriaxone and Cefotaxime

Author:

Karlowsky James A.1,Jones Mark E.1,Draghi Deborah C.1,Sahm Daniel F.1

Affiliation:

1. Focus Technologies, Herndon, Virginia 20171

Abstract

ABSTRACT Ceftriaxone and cefotaxime are extended-spectrum cephalosporins previously demonstrated to possess very similar in vitro activities against Streptococcus pneumoniae . Anecdotal reports of isolates with divergent in vitro susceptibilities to ceftriaxone and cefotaxime have been published. To determine the prevalence of pneumococcal isolates with divergent ceftriaxone and cefotaxime susceptibilities, we tested 1,000 clinical isolates collected by U.S. laboratories in 2001-2002 by broth microdilution and E-test. The percentages of isolates susceptible to ceftriaxone and cefotaxime were significantly different by both broth microdilution (98.6 and 96.6%, respectively; P < 0.05) and E-test (98.3 and 95.8%; P < 0.001). The differences observed were due solely to the activities of the two agents against penicillin-resistant isolates. Twenty-six of 188 penicillin-resistant isolates (13.8%) demonstrated different ceftriaxone and cefotaxime MIC interpretative phenotypes when tested by broth microdilution; 18 isolates were concurrently ceftriaxone susceptible and cefotaxime intermediate, 6 were ceftriaxone intermediate and cefotaxime resistant, and 2 were ceftriaxone susceptible and cefotaxime resistant (1.1% of penicillin-resistant isolates; 0.2% of all isolates tested). Sixteen of the 26 isolates (65%) were from southern U.S. states. The 26 isolates had serogroups and serotypes (6, 9, 14, 19, and 23) commonly associated with penicillin-resistant isolates; Sma I pulsed-field gel electrophoresis identified 18 isolates (69%) dispersed among five subtype groups and 8 isolates that were unrelated to any of the other isolates. We conclude that certain isolates of penicillin-resistant pneumococci are less susceptible to cefotaxime than to ceftriaxone and that these isolates are not the result of the spread of a single clone. Whether such isolates have increased in prevalence over time remains unknown.

Publisher

American Society for Microbiology

Subject

Infectious Diseases,Pharmacology (medical),Pharmacology

Cited by 21 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3