Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, April 1998, p. 953-955, Vol. 42, No. 4
Departments of Pathology (Clinical
Microbiology), Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, Pennsylvania
17033,1 and
Case Western Reserve
University, Cleveland, Ohio 441062
Received 23 October 1997/Returned for modification 17 December
1997/Accepted 5 January 1998
A total of 124 Pseudomonas aeruginosa strains were
tested for synergy between levofloxacin and cefpirome, ceftazidime,
gentamicin, and meropenem. Checkerboards yielded synergistic fractional
inhibitory concentration (FIC) indices ( Standard therapy for
Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections includes broad-spectrum
cephalosporins, such as cefpirome (not available in the United States)
and ceftazidime; aminoglycosides, such as gentamicin; and carbapenems,
such as imipenem and meropenem (3, 5-7, 10, 11, 13-17).
Levofloxacin, the l-isomer of ofloxacin, is also active
against this organism (9, 19, 20). The current study
investigated the activity of levofloxacin, alone and in combination
with cefpirome, ceftazidime, gentamicin, and meropenem, against 124 P. aeruginosa strains with different susceptibilities to the
latter four agents.
One hundred twenty-four strains of P. aeruginosa, recently
isolated from clinical specimens and identified by conventional methodology (12), were tested. Strains resistant to
cephalosporins and meropenem only were obtained from David Livermore
(Central Public Health Laboratories, London, United Kingdom). Strains
included 30 susceptible to ceftazidime, cefpirome, gentamicin, and
meropenem; 26 resistant to ceftazidime only; 21 resistant to gentamicin
only; 24 resistant to meropenem only; and 23 with various
susceptibility patterns. Laboratory powders of known potency were
obtained from their various manufacturers.
MICs of each agent alone were determined by broth microdilution testing
according to standard National Committee for Clinical Laboratory
Standards (NCCLS) methodology (18). Breakpoints for ceftazidime and gentamicin were those recommended by NCCLS
(18). Breakpoints used for meropenem were identical to those
of imipenem (18), as recently approved (but not yet
published) by NCCLS. No cefpirome breakpoints are available. Strains
with intermediate susceptibility (18) to ceftazidime,
gentamicin, and meropenem were classified as resistant. Less than 5%
of resistant strains were intermediate to ceftazidime and gentamicin,
but 48% were intermediate to meropenem: all of the latter, however,
were resistant (MICs of Checkerboard synergy was performed as described previously
(2). Fractional inhibitory concentrations (FICs) were
calculated as (MIC of drug A or B in combination)/(MIC of drug A or B
alone), and the FIC index was obtained by adding the FIC values. FIC
indices were interpreted as synergistic if values were Three strains from each of the above four susceptibility groups were
tested by time-kill as described previously (1, 2). All
compounds were tested alone, and levofloxacin was tested in combination
with cefpirome, ceftazidime, gentamicin, and meropenem. Viability
counts were performed at 0, 6, 12, and 24 h. Drug carryover was
addressed by dilution, as described previously (1, 2). In
view of regrowth in many strains (which could have been selected in vitro) after 24 h, synergy was defined as a Results of microbroth MIC testing of each agent alone for the four
organism groups as well as the miscellaneous group are presented in
Table 1. As can be seen, high-level
resistance to levofloxacin (
0066-4804/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Determination of Activities of Levofloxacin, Alone
and Combined with Gentamicin, Ceftazidime, Cefpirome, and Meropenem,
against 124 Strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa by
Checkerboard and Time-Kill Methodology
![]()
ABSTRACT
Top
Abstract
Text
References
0.5) with 25 of 496 possible
combinations. All other FIC indices were >0.5 to 2 (additive or
indifferent), with no antagonism. Time-kill studies with 12 strains
showed that levofloxacin (0.06 to 0.5 µg/ml) was synergistic with
cefpirome, ceftazidime, gentamicin, and meropenem in 10, 9, 4, and 11 strains, respectively.
![]()
TEXT
Top
Abstract
Text
References
16 µg/ml) to imipenem. Additionally,
because serious P. aeruginosa infections caused by strains
with intermediate resistance are treated as if fully resistant, we
elected to combine the two groups.
0.5, additive or indifferent if >0.5 to 4.0 and antagonistic if >4.0 (1, 2,
8).
2-log decrease in
the viable count of the combination at 12 h compared to the more
active of the two agents alone (8).
8 µg/ml) was only seen in
gentamicin-resistant strains; in other strains, MICs at which 90% of
the isolates are inhibited (MIC90s) were
4 µg/ml.
TABLE 1.
Broth microdilution MIC50s and
MIC90s of each agent
alone
Checkerboard titration results are listed in Table
2. Synergistic FIC indices (
0.5) were
found in nine strains (7.3%) (three fully susceptible, three resistant
to ceftazidime, three miscellaneous) with levofloxacin-cefpirome, eight
strains (6.5%) (three ceftazidime resistant, four meropenem resistant,
one miscellaneous) with levofloxacin plus ceftazidime, one
ceftazidime-resistant strain (0.8%) with levofloxacin-gentamicin, and
seven strains (5.6%) (two fully susceptible, two ceftazidime
resistant, one meropenem resistant, two miscellaneous) with
levofloxacin plus meropenem. All other FIC indices were >0.5 to 2 (additive or indifferent), and no antagonism (FIC indices of >4) was
found.
|
The results of time-kill synergy tests are listed in Table 3. Checkerboard titrations with these strains showed that one strain showed synergy with levofloxacin plus ceftazidime, and one showed synergy with levofloxacin plus meropenem. Time-kill synergy assays showed that levofloxacin, at sub-MIC concentrations of 0.06 to 0.5 µg/ml, showed synergy with cefpirome, ceftazidime, gentamicin, and meropenem in 10, 9, 4, and 11 strains, respectively.
|
Levofloxacin yields MICs for all organisms which are 1 to 2 dilutions
lower than those for ofloxacin (9, 19, 20). Our study
confirms these findings. Of note in our study were the higher levofloxacin MICs for strains resistant to gentamicin only. Recently, NCCLS has approved breakpoints of
2.0 µg/ml (susceptible), 4.0 µg/ml (intermediate), and
8.0 µg/ml (18). Recent
studies have documented MIC50s of 0.5 to 1.0 µg/ml and
MIC90s of 2.0 to 8.0 µg/ml for P. aeruginosa
(9, 20). Of broad-spectrum cephalosporins with activity
against P. aeruginosa, cefpirome has been reported to have a
MIC50 of 2.0 to 16.0 µg/ml and a MIC90 of 8.0 to 16.0 µg/ml (5, 10, 14). Gargalianos et al.
(10) have demonstrated the range of cefpirome MICs to be 1.0 to 16.0 µg/ml in P. aeruginosa strains with increased
non-
-lactamase-mediated resistance to carbenicillin,
plasmid-mediated
-lactamase production, and partially derepressed
chromosomal
-lactamase expression. Two strains with totally
derepressed chromosomal
-lactamase expression yielded cefpirome MICs
of 16.0 and 32.0 µg/ml, respectively. In all of the latter resistance
groups, ceftazidime MIC ranges were <0.5 to 32.0 µg/ml
(10).
Ceftazidime MICs for P. aeruginosa generally correspond with those of cefpirome (3, 5, 10, 14). This was also the case in our study. Although a small percentage of P. aeruginosa strains are resistant to ceftazidime, widespread use of this compound in the United States has not led to a significant rise in ceftazidime resistance (3). Although gentamicin was originally very active against P. aeruginosa strains, resistance is common in most hospital settings (6, 11, 15, 16).
Meropenem, a recently developed parenteral carbapenem, is very active
against P. aeruginosa, with MIC50s of 0.25 to
0.5 µg/ml and MIC90s of 1.0 to 4.0 µg/ml for
imipenem-susceptible strains. The in vitro activity of meropenem is
greater than that of imipenem (7, 13, 16). Against a series
of P. aeruginosa strains with well-characterized resistance
mechanisms, meropenem retained high-level activity against strains with
the more common types of resistance mechanisms known to affect other
-lactams. Resistance to meropenem may not arise as readily in
P. aeruginosa as it does with most other
-lactams
(16).
Our findings that time-kill tests for synergy were more discriminatory
than the checkerboard methodology reflect findings by our group and
others for other organisms (1, 2, 4). Our study shows that
levofloxacin, in sub-MIC concentrations of
0.5 µg/ml, was
synergistic at 12 h, when combined with cefpirome, ceftazidime, or
meropenem in 9 to 11 strains, and had lower synergy rates when combined
with gentamicin. Clinical studies are necessary to test the validity of
these in vitro findings, as well as the significance of regrowth after
24 h.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
This study was supported by a grant from Hoechst-Marion-Roussel, Clinical Pharmacology and Anti-infectives, Romainville, France.
We thank D. Livermore for provision of some strains.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of Pathology, Hershey Medical Center, P.O. Box 850, Hershey, PA 17033. Phone: (717) 531-5113. Fax: (717) 531-7953. E-mail: pappelba{at}psuhmc.hmc.psu.edu.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Bajaksouzian, S., M. A. Visalli, M. R. Jacobs, and P. C. Appelbaum. 1996. Antipneumococcal activities of cefpirome and cefotaxime, alone and in combination with vancomycin and teicoplanin, determined by checkerboard and time-kill methods. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 40:1973-1976[Abstract]. |
| 2. | Bajaksouzian, S., M. A. Visalli, M. R. Jacobs, and P. C. Appelbaum. 1997. Activities of levofloxacin, ofloxacin, and ciprofloxacin, alone and in combination with amikacin, against acinetobacters as determined by checkerboard and time-kill studies. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 41:1073-1076[Abstract]. |
| 3. | Burwen, D. R., S. N. Banerjee, R. P. Gaynes, and the National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance System. 1994. Ceftazidime resistance among selected nosocomial gram-negative bacilli in the United States. J. Infect. Dis. 170:1622-1625[Medline]. |
| 4. | Cappelletty, D. M., and M. J. Rybak. 1996. Comparison of methodologies for synergism testing of drug combinations against resistant strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 40:677-683[Abstract]. |
| 5. |
Cheng, A. F. B.,
T. K. W. Ling,
A. W. Lam,
K. S. C. Fung, and R. Wise.
1993.
The antimicrobial activity and -lactamase stability of cefpirome, a new fourth-generation cephalosporin in comparison with other agents.
J. Antimicrob. Chemother.
31:699-709 |
| 6. | Edson, R. S., and C. L. Terrell. 1991. The aminoglycosides. Mayo Clin. Proc. 66:1158-1164[Medline]. |
| 7. | Edwards, J. R. 1995. Meropenem: a microbiological overview. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 36(Suppl. A):1-17. |
| 8. | Eliopoulos, G., and R. C. Moellering, Jr. 1996. Antimicrobial combinations, p. 330-396. In V. Lorian (ed.), Antibiotics in laboratory medicine, 4th ed. Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore, Md. |
| 9. |
Fu, K. P.,
S. C. Lafredo,
B. Foleno,
D. M. Isaacson,
J. F. Barrett,
A. J. Tobia, and M. E. Rosenthale.
1992.
In vitro and in vivo antibacterial activities of levofloxacin (l-ofloxacin), an optically active ofloxacin.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
36:860-866 |
| 10. |
Gargalianos, P.,
B. A. Oppenheim,
P. Skepastianos,
D. M. Livermore, and R. J. Williams.
1988.
Activity of cefpirome (HR 810) against Pseudomonas aeruginosa strains with characterized resistance mechanisms to -lactam antibiotics.
J. Antimicrob. Chemother.
22:841-848 |
| 11. | Gerding, D. N., T. A. Larson, R. A. Hughes, M. Weiler, C. Shanholtzer, and L. R. Petersen. 1991. Aminoglycoside resistance and aminoglycoside usage: ten years of experience in one hospital. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 35:1284-1290. |
| 12. | Gilligan, P. H. 1995. Pseudomonas and Burkholderia, p. 509-519. In P. R. Murray, E. J. Baron, M. A. Pfaller, F. C. Tenover, and R. H. Yolken (ed.), Manual of clinical microbiology, 6th ed. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, D.C. |
| 13. | Jones, R. N. 1992. The current and future impact of antimicrobial resistance among nosocomial bacterial pathogens. Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 15:3S-10S[Medline]. |
| 14. | Jones, R. N., M. A. Pfaller, S. D. Allen, E. H. Gerlach, P. C. Fuchs, and K. E. Aldridge. 1991. Antimicrobial activity of cefpirome. An update compared to five third-generation cephalosporins against nearly 6,000 recent clinical isolates from five medical centers. Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 14:361-364[Medline]. |
| 15. | Levin, S., and P. H. Karakusis. 1986. Future trends in aminoglycoside therapy. Am. J. Med. 80(Suppl. 6B):190-194. |
| 16. | Livermore, D. M., and Y. Yang. 1989. Comparative activity of meropenem against Pseudomonas aeruginosa strains with well-characterized resistance mechanisms. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 24(Suppl. A):149-159. |
| 17. | Moellering, R. C., Jr., G. M. Eliopoulos, and
D. E. Sentochnik. 1989. The carbapenems: new broad-spectrum
-lactam antibiotics. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 24(Suppl.
A):1-7.
|
| 18. | National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. 1997. Methods for dilution antimicrobial susceptibility tests for bacteria that grow aerobically, 4th ed. Approved standard. NCCLS publication no. M7-A4. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards, Villanova, Pa. |
| 19. |
Neu, H. C., and N.-X. Chin.
1989.
In vitro activity of S-ofloxacin.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
33:1105-1107 |
| 20. |
Tanaka, M.,
M. Otsuki,
T. Une, and T. Nishino.
1990.
In-vitro and in-vivo activity of DR-3355, an optically active isomer of ofloxacin.
J. Antimicrob. Chemother.
26:659-666 |
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»