您的位置：山东大学 -> 科技期刊社 -> 《山东大学学报（医学版）》

山东大学学报（医学版） ›› 2017, Vol. 55 ›› Issue (4): 82-85.doi: 10.6040/j.issn.1671-7554.0.2016.283

• 临床医学 • 上一篇    下一篇

西他沙星、头孢哌酮/舒巴坦和多黏菌素E单药及联合用药对泛耐药鲍曼不动杆菌的抗菌活性

李安, 陈丰哲,王正,孟祥珠,许楠楠,马立宪   

  1. 山东大学齐鲁医院感染性疾病科, 山东 济南 250012
  • 收稿日期:2016-03-15 出版日期:2017-04-10 发布日期:2017-04-10
  • 通讯作者: 马立宪. E-mail:mlx@sdu.edu.cn E-mail:mlx@sdu.edu.cn
  • 基金资助:
    山东省医药卫生科技发展计划(2015ws0290)

In vitro synergy testing of sitafloxacin, cefoperazone-sulbactam and polymyxin E against extensively drug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii

LI An, CHEN Fengzhe, WANG Zheng, MENG Xiangzhu, XU Nannan, MA Lixian   

  1. Department of Infectious Diseases, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan 250012, Shandong, China
  • Received:2016-03-15 Online:2017-04-10 Published:2017-04-10

PDF (PC)

147

摘要： 目的 评估西他沙星、头孢哌酮/舒巴坦(1∶1)和多黏菌素E单药及联合用药对泛耐药鲍曼不动杆菌的体外抗菌活性。 方法 从临床中分离得到22株泛耐药鲍曼不动杆菌。单一用药时,微量肉汤稀释法测定3种抗生素对泛耐药鲍曼不动杆菌的最低抑菌浓度(MIC)。联合用药时,棋盘稀释法测定MIC,并分别计算部分抑菌浓度(FIC)及部分抑菌浓度指数(FICI)判定联合效应。 结果 单一用药时,西他沙星的MIC为0.25~16 μg/mL;头孢哌酮/舒巴坦(1∶1)的MIC为4.0/4.0 μg/mL~128/128 μg/mL;多黏菌素E的MIC为 0.5~8.0 μg/mL。两两联合用药时,3种药物的MIC均降低。 结论 西他沙星、头孢哌酮/舒巴坦(1∶1)和多黏菌素E 3种抗生素两两联合用药时,抗菌药物均表现出协同、部分协同或是相加的作用,药物联合应用没有表现出拮抗作用。

关键词: 泛耐药鲍曼不动杆菌, 头孢哌酮/舒巴坦, 多黏菌素E, 联合用药, 西他沙星

Abstract: Objective To evaluate the in vitro activities of sitafloxacin, cefoperazone-sulbactam(1∶1)and polymyxin E used alone or in combination against extensively drug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (XDR-A. baumannii). Methods A total of 22 strains of XDR-A. baumannii were isolated from clinical patients. The minimum inhibitory concentration(MIC)values of sitafloxacin, cefoperazone-sulbactam(1∶1), and polymyxin E used alone against XDR-A. baumannii were determined by broth microdilution method, and the MIC of drugs used in combination were determined by the checkerboard method. According to the MICs results, the values of fractional inhibitory concentration(FIC)and FIC index(FICI)were calculated. Results The MIC of sitafloxacin, cefoperazone-sulbactam(1∶1), and polymyxin E used alone was 0.25-16, 4.0/4.0-128/128, and 0.5-8.0 μg/mL, respectively. When two drugs were used in combination, all of the MICs were decreased. Conclusion Most combinations of the three drugs were synergy, partial synergy or additive when compared to the drugs used alone.

Key words: Extensively drug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii, Polymyxin E, Combinations, Sitafloxacin, Cefoperazone-sulbactam

中图分类号: 

  • R378.99
[1] Cerqueira GM, Peleg AY. Insights into Acinetobacter baumannii pathogenicity[J]. IUBMB life, 2011, 63(12):1055-1060.
[2] Howard A, ODonoghue M, Feeney A. Acinetobacter baumannii: an emerging opportunistic pathogen[J]. Virulence, 2012, 3(3):243-250.
[3] Liu WP, Tian YQ, Hai YT, et al. Prevalence survey of nosocomial infections in the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region of China[2012-2014] [J]. J Thorac Dis, 2015, 7(9):1650-1657.
[4] 陈佰义, 何礼贤, 胡必杰, 等. 中国鲍曼不动杆菌感染诊治与防控专家共识[J]. 中华医学杂志, 2012, 92(2):76-85.
[5] Roca I, Espinal P, Vila-Farrés X, et al. The Acinetobacter baumannii oxymoron: commensal hospital dweller turned pan-drug-resistant menace[J]. Front Microbiol, 2012, 3:148. doi:10.3389/fmicb.2012.00148. eCollection, 2012.
[6] Magiorakos AP, Srinivasan A, Carey RB. Multidrug-resistant, extensively drug-resistant and pandrug-resistant bacteria: an international expert proposal for interim standard definitions for acquired resistance[J]. Clin Microbiol Infect, 2012, 18(3): 268-281.
[7] CLSI. Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing; Twenty-Fifth Informational Supplement: CLSI Document M100-S25[S]. Wayne. PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 2015. http://www.clsi.org.
[8] Thamlikitkul V, Tiengrim S. In vitro activity of sitafloxacin against carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii[J]. Int J Antimicrob Agents, 2013, 42(3): 284-285.
[9] European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. Breakpoint tables for interpretation of MICs and zone diameters. Version 5.0[EB/OL].(2015-01-01)[2016-03-15]. http://www.eucast.org/fileadmin/src/media/PDFs/EUCAST_files/Breakpoint_tables/v_5.0_Breakpoint_Table_01.pdf
[10] Kiffer CR, Sampaio JL, Sinto S, et al. In vitro synergy test of meropenem and sulbactam against clinical isolates of Acinetobacter baumannii[J]. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis, 2005, 52(4):317-322.
[11] Alfandari S, Gois J, Delannoy PY, et al. Management and control of a carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii outbreak in an intensive care unit[J]. Med Mal Infect, 2014, 44(5):229-231.
[12] Ayraud-Thévenot S, Huart C, Mimoz O, et al. Control of multi-drug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii outbreaks in an intensive care unit: feasibility and economic impact of rapid unit closure[J]. J Hosp Infect, 2012, 82(4):290-292.
[13] Jean SS, Hsueh PR. High burden of antimicrobial resistance in Asia[J]. Int J Antimicrob Agents, 2011, 37(4):291-295.
[14] Bean DC, Wigmore SM. Antibiotic tolerance and combination therapy[J]. MBio, 2015, 6(2):e00120. doi: 10.1128/mBio.00120-15.
[15] Kempf M, Rolain JM. Emergence of resistance to carbapenems in Acinetobacter baumannii in Europe: clinical impact and therapeutic options[J]. Int J Antimicrob Agents, 2012, 39(2):105-114.
[16] Viehman JA, Nguyen MH, Doi Y. Treatment options for carbapenem-resistant and extensively drug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii infections[J]. Drugs, 2014, 74(12):1315-1333.
[17] Huang YS, Wang JT, Sheng WH, et al. Comparative in vitro activity of sitafloxacin against bacteremic isolates of carbapenem resistant Acinetobacter baumannii complex[J]. J Microbiol Immunol Infect, 2015,48(5): 545-551.
[1] 李陶1，李玉1，汪雯1，张帆2，顾腾振3. 碳青霉烯类药物联合舒巴坦或头孢哌酮对铜绿假单胞菌的药敏影响[J]. 山东大学学报(医学版), 2013, 51(8): 65-68.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!
版权所有 © 2018 《山东大学学报(医学版)》编辑部　
地址:山东大学科技期刊社（济南市历城区山大南路27号山东大学中心校区明德楼B座721室） 电话: 0531-88366918 E-mail: xbyxb@sdu.edu.cn
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发