Fosfomycin – Choice in ESBL & MBL Gram Negative Bacilli Strains?
Creators
- 1. Assistant Professor, MKCG MCH, Berhampur, Odisha-760004
- 2. Assistant Professor, Maharashtra Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, MUHS, Nashik
- 3. Assistant professor, IMS SUM Hospital, BBSR
- 4. Assistant Professor, Department of Microbiology, Dharanidhar Medical College and Hospital
- 5. Professor, Mysore medical College, Karnataka
Description
Background: The increasing antimicrobial drug resistance of bacterial pathogens, together with the relative shortage of new antimicrobial agents, call for a new look at the therapeutic options. Fosfomycin is an old antibiotic. Nowadays, many clinicians and scientists are having a re-look at its effectiveness against multi-resistant microorganisms. Objectives: 1. To test susceptibility of ESBL & MBL producing gram negative bacteria to fosfomycin, imipenem, colistin, netilmycin, and tigecycline. 2. To compare susceptibility of fosfomycin with other antibiotics. Materials & Methods: From routine exudate samples 50 ESBL and 50 MBL isolates were included. Their susceptibility was determined to colistin, fosfomycin, imipenem, tigecycline, netilmycin. Results: Out of 50 ESBL E.coli (22/50) was commonest while among MBL, Ps. aeruginosa(22/50). Susceptibility to fosfomycin among ESBL and MBL isolates were 82% and 90% respectively. Colistin was found to be sensitive in 88% ESBL and 100% of MBL isolates. whereas sensitivity to tigecycline and netilmycin among ESBL was 34% & 68% & that of MBL was 33% & 45% respectively. The susceptibility of imipenem in ESBL isolates was 88%. Conclusion: Fosfomycin is a good choice irrespective of ESBL or MBL. Imipenem can still be used in ESBL. Colistin is ideal for MBL.
Abstract (English)
Background: The increasing antimicrobial drug resistance of bacterial pathogens, together with the relative shortage of new antimicrobial agents, call for a new look at the therapeutic options. Fosfomycin is an old antibiotic. Nowadays, many clinicians and scientists are having a re-look at its effectiveness against multi-resistant microorganisms. Objectives: 1. To test susceptibility of ESBL & MBL producing gram negative bacteria to fosfomycin, imipenem, colistin, netilmycin, and tigecycline. 2. To compare susceptibility of fosfomycin with other antibiotics. Materials & Methods: From routine exudate samples 50 ESBL and 50 MBL isolates were included. Their susceptibility was determined to colistin, fosfomycin, imipenem, tigecycline, netilmycin. Results: Out of 50 ESBL E.coli (22/50) was commonest while among MBL, Ps. aeruginosa(22/50). Susceptibility to fosfomycin among ESBL and MBL isolates were 82% and 90% respectively. Colistin was found to be sensitive in 88% ESBL and 100% of MBL isolates. whereas sensitivity to tigecycline and netilmycin among ESBL was 34% & 68% & that of MBL was 33% & 45% respectively. The susceptibility of imipenem in ESBL isolates was 88%. Conclusion: Fosfomycin is a good choice irrespective of ESBL or MBL. Imipenem can still be used in ESBL. Colistin is ideal for MBL.
Files
IJPCR,Vol16,Issue2,Article264.pdf
Files
(547.3 kB)
| Name | Size | Download all |
|---|---|---|
|
md5:35901bea1a215e23d2d56e4bb38f2590
|
547.3 kB | Preview Download |
Additional details
Dates
- Accepted
-
2024-02-10
Software
- Repository URL
- https://impactfactor.org/PDF/IJPCR/16/IJPCR,Vol16,Issue2,Article264.pdf
- Development Status
- Active
References
- 1. Falagas ME, Giannopoulou KP, Kokolakis GN, Rafailidis PI. Fosfomycin: use beyond urinary tract and gastrointestinal infections. Clin Infect Dis. 2008; 46:1069–77. 2. Sauermann R, Karch R, Langenberger H, Kettenbach J, Mayer-Helm B, Petsch M et al. Antibiotic Abscess Penetration: Fosfomycin Levels Measured in Pus and Simulated Concentration-Time Profiles. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2005; 49:4448–4454. 3. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing; CLSI document M100-S25. Wayne PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2016. 4. Patel SS, Balfour JA, Bryson HM. Fosfomycintromethamine. A review of its antibacterial activity, pharmacokinetic properties and therapeutic efficacy as a single-dose oral treatment for acute uncomplicated lower urinary tract infections. Drugs 1997;53:637–56. 5. Arca P, Reguera G, Hardisson C. Plasmidencoded fosfomycin resistance in bacteria isolated from the urinary tract in a multicentre survey. J Antimicrob Chemother 1997; 40:393–9 6. Nilsson AI, Berg OG, Aspevall O, Kahlmeter G, Andersson DI. Biological costs and mechanisms of fosfomycin resistance in Escherichia coli. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2003; 47:2850–8 7. Suarez JE, Mendoza MC. Plasmid-encoded fosfomycin resistance. AntimicrobAgents Chemother 1991; 35:791–5 8. Rodriguez-Bano J, Alcala JC, Cisneros JM, Grill F, Oliver A, Horcajada JP, et al. Community infections caused by extendedspectrum -lactamase-producing Escherichia coli. Arch Intern Med 2008; 168:1897–902 9. Falagas ME, Giannopoulou KP, Kokolakis GN, Rafailidis PI. Fosfomycin: use beyond urinary tract and gastrointestinal infections. Clin Infect Dis 2008; 46:1069– 77