These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Third Belgian multicentre survey of antibiotic susceptibility of anaerobic bacteria.
    Author: Wybo I, Piérard D, Verschraegen I, Reynders M, Vandoorslaer K, Claeys G, Delmée M, Glupczynski Y, Gordts B, Ieven M, Melin P, Struelens M, Verhaegen J, Lauwers S.
    Journal: J Antimicrob Chemother; 2007 Jan; 59(1):132-9. PubMed ID: 17095529.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVES: To collect recent data on the susceptibility of anaerobes and to compare them with results from previous studies. METHODS: Four hundred and forty-three anaerobic clinical isolates from various body sites were prospectively collected from October 2003 to February 2005 in nine Belgian hospitals. MICs were determined for nine anti-anaerobic and three recently developed antibiotics. RESULTS: Most gram-negative bacilli except Fusobacterium spp. were resistant to penicillin. Piperacillin/tazobactam, metronidazole, chloramphenicol, meropenem and amoxicillin/clavulanic acid were very active against all groups, but only 86% of Bacteroides fragilis group strains were susceptible to the latter. Cefoxitin, cefotetan and clindamycin were less active. In particular, only 62%, 52% and 48% of B. fragilis group strains were susceptible, respectively. Clindamycin shows a continuing decrease in activity, as 83% were still susceptible in 1987 and 66% in 1993-94. Anti-anaerobic activity of the new antibiotics is interesting, with MIC50 and MIC90 of 1 and >32 mg/L for moxifloxacin, 2 and 4 mg/L for linezolid and 0.5 and 8 mg/L for tigecycline. CONCLUSIONS: The susceptibility of anaerobic bacteria remains stable in Belgium, except for clindamycin, which shows a continuous decrease in activity. However, for each of the tested antibiotics, at least a few resistant organisms were detected. Consequently, for severe infections involving anaerobic bacteria, it could be advisable to perform microbiological testing instead of relying on known susceptibility profiles. Periodically monitoring background susceptibility remains necessary to guide empirical therapy.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]