107 research outputs found

    Comparison of pharmacodynamics of azithromycin and erythromycin in vitro and in vivo

    Get PDF
    In this study, we determined the efficacy of various dosing regimens for erythromycin and azithromycin against four pneumococci with different susceptibilities to penicillin in an in vitro pharmacokinetic model and in a mouse peritonitis model. The MIC was 0.03 microg/ml, and the 50% effective doses (determined after one dose) of both drugs were comparable for the four pneumococcal strains and were in the range of 1.83 to 6.22 mg/kg. Dosing experiments with mice, using regimens for azithromycin of one to eight doses/6 h, showed the one-dose regimen to give the best result; of the pharmacodynamic parameters tested (the maximum drug concentration in serum [Cmax], the times that the drug concentration in serum remained above the MIC and above the concentration required for maximum killing, and the area under the concentration time curve), Cmax was the best predictor of outcome. The bacterial counts in mouse blood or peritoneal fluid during the first 24 h after challenge were not correlated to survival of the mice. The serum concentration profiles obtained with mice for the different dosing regimens were simulated in the in vitro pharmacokinetic model. Here as well, the one-dose regimen of azithromycin showed the best result. However, the killing curves in vivo in mouse blood and peritoneal fluid and in the vitro pharmacokinetic model were not similar. The in vitro killing curves showed a decrease of 2 log10 within 2 and 3 h for azithromycin and erythromycin, respectively whereas the in vivo killing curves showed a bacteriostatic effect for both drugs. It is concluded that the results in terms of predictive pharmacodynamic parameters are comparable for the in vitro and in vivo models and that high initial concentrations of azithromycin favor a good outcome

    Spinal infection: state of the art and management algorithm

    Get PDF
    Spinal infection is a rare pathology although a concerning rising incidence has been observed in recent years. This increase might reflect a progressively more susceptible population but also the availability of increased diagnostic accuracy. Yet, even with improved diagnosis tools and procedures, the delay in diagnosis remains an important issue. This review aims to highlight the importance of a methodological attitude towards accurate and prompt diagnosis using an algorithm to aid on spinal infection management. METHODS: Appropriate literature on spinal infection was selected using databases from the US National Library of Medicine and the National Institutes of Health. RESULTS: Literature reveals that histopathological analysis of infected tissues is a paramount for diagnosis and must be performed routinely. Antibiotic therapy is transversal to both conservative and surgical approaches and must be initiated after etiological diagnosis. Indications for surgical treatment include neurological deficits or sepsis, spine instability and/or deformity, presence of epidural abscess and upon failure of conservative treatment. CONCLUSIONS: A methodological assessment could lead to diagnosis effectiveness of spinal infection. Towards this, we present a management algorithm based on literature findings

    Aerococcus urinae and Aerococcus sanguinicola:Susceptibility Testing of 120 Isolates to Six Antimicrobial Agents Using Disk Diffusion (EUCAST), Etest, and Broth Microdilution Techniques

    Get PDF
    Background: Aerococcus urinae and Aerococcus sanguinicola are relatively newcomers and emerging organisms in clinical and microbiological practice. Both species have worldwide been associated with urinary tract infections. More rarely cases of bacteremia/septicemia and infective endocarditis have been reported. Treatment options are therefore important. Just recently, European recommendations on susceptibility testing and interpretive criteria have been released. Objective: In this investigation 120 A. urinae and A. sanguinicola isolates were tested for susceptibility to six antimicrobial agents: Penicillin, cefotaxime, meropenem, vancomycin, linezolid, and rifampicin. Methods: Three susceptibility testing methods were used; disk diffusion according to The European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) standardized disk diffusion methodology and MIC determination with Etest and broth microdilution (BMD). All testing was performed with EUCAST media for fastidious organisms.Results: Data obtained in this study were part of the background data for establishing EUCAST breakpoints. MIC values obtained by Etest and BMD were well correlated with disk diffusion results.Conclusion: All isolates were found susceptible to all six antimicrobial agents: penicillin, cefotaxime, meropenem, vancomycin, linezolid, and rifampicin.</p

    Trends in invasive bacterial diseases during the first 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic: analyses of prospective surveillance data from 30 countries and territories in the IRIS Consortium

    Get PDF
    Background The Invasive Respiratory Infection Surveillance (IRIS) Consortium was established to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on invasive diseases caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae, Neisseria meningitidis, and Streptococcus agalactiae. We aimed to analyse the incidence and distribution of these diseases during the first 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the 2 years preceding the pandemic. Methods For this prospective analysis, laboratories in 30 countries and territories representing five continents submitted surveillance data from Jan 1, 2018, to Jan 2, 2022, to private projects within databases in PubMLST. The impact of COVID-19 containment measures on the overall number of cases was analysed, and changes in disease distributions by patient age and serotype or group were examined. Interrupted time-series analyses were done to quantify the impact of pandemic response measures and their relaxation on disease rates, and autoregressive integrated moving average models were used to estimate effect sizes and forecast counterfactual trends by hemisphere. Findings Overall, 116 841 cases were analysed: 76 481 in 2018–19, before the pandemic, and 40 360 in 2020–21, during the pandemic. During the pandemic there was a significant reduction in the risk of disease caused by S pneumoniae (risk ratio 0·47; 95% CI 0·40–0·55), H influenzae (0·51; 0·40–0·66) and N meningitidis (0·26; 0·21–0·31), while no significant changes were observed for S agalactiae (1·02; 0·75–1·40), which is not transmitted via the respiratory route. No major changes in the distribution of cases were observed when stratified by patient age or serotype or group. An estimated 36 289 (95% prediction interval 17 145–55 434) cases of invasive bacterial disease were averted during the first 2 years of the pandemic among IRIS-participating countries and territories. Interpretation COVID-19 containment measures were associated with a sustained decrease in the incidence of invasive disease caused by S pneumoniae, H influenzae, and N meningitidis during the first 2 years of the pandemic, but cases began to increase in some countries towards the end of 2021 as pandemic restrictions were lifted. These IRIS data provide a better understanding of microbial transmission, will inform vaccine development and implementation, and can contribute to health-care service planning and provision of policies. Funding Wellcome Trust, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency, Torsten Söderberg Foundation, Stockholm County Council, Swedish Research Council, German Federal Ministry of Health, Robert Koch Institute, Pfizer, Merck, and the Greek National Public Health Organization

    Rifampicin reduces plasma concentration of linezolid in patients with infective endocarditis

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND\nOBJECTIVES\nPATIENTS AND METHODS\nRESULTS\nCONCLUSIONS\nLinezolid in combination with rifampicin has been used in treatment of infective endocarditis especially for patients infected with staphylococci.\nBecause rifampicin has been reported to reduce the plasma concentration of linezolid, the present study aimed to characterize the population pharmacokinetics of linezolid for the purpose of quantifying an effect of rifampicin cotreatment. In addition, the possibility of compensation by dosage adjustments was evaluated.\nPharmacokinetic measurements were performed in 62 patients treated with linezolid for left-sided infective endocarditis in the Partial Oral Endocarditis Treatment (POET) trial. Fifteen patients were cotreated with rifampicin. A total of 437 linezolid plasma concentrations were obtained. The pharmacokinetic data were adequately described by a one-compartment model with first-order absorption and first-order elimination.\nWe demonstrated a substantial increase of linezolid clearance by 150% (95% CI: 78%-251%), when combined with rifampicin. The final model was evaluated by goodness-of-fit plots showing an acceptable fit, and a visual predictive check validated the model. Model-based dosing simulations showed that rifampicin cotreatment decreased the PTA of linezolid from 94.3% to 34.9% and from 52.7% to 3.5% for MICs of 2 mg/L and 4 mg/L, respectively.\nA substantial interaction between linezolid and rifampicin was detected in patients with infective endocarditis, and the interaction was stronger than previously reported. Model-based simulations showed that increasing the linezolid dose might compensate without increasing the risk of adverse effects to the same degree.Pharmacolog

    Trends in invasive bacterial diseases during the first 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic: analyses of prospective surveillance data from 30 countries and territories in the IRIS Consortium.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND The Invasive Respiratory Infection Surveillance (IRIS) Consortium was established to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on invasive diseases caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae, Neisseria meningitidis, and Streptococcus agalactiae. We aimed to analyse the incidence and distribution of these diseases during the first 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the 2 years preceding the pandemic. METHODS For this prospective analysis, laboratories in 30 countries and territories representing five continents submitted surveillance data from Jan 1, 2018, to Jan 2, 2022, to private projects within databases in PubMLST. The impact of COVID-19 containment measures on the overall number of cases was analysed, and changes in disease distributions by patient age and serotype or group were examined. Interrupted time-series analyses were done to quantify the impact of pandemic response measures and their relaxation on disease rates, and autoregressive integrated moving average models were used to estimate effect sizes and forecast counterfactual trends by hemisphere. FINDINGS Overall, 116 841 cases were analysed: 76 481 in 2018-19, before the pandemic, and 40 360 in 2020-21, during the pandemic. During the pandemic there was a significant reduction in the risk of disease caused by S pneumoniae (risk ratio 0·47; 95% CI 0·40-0·55), H influenzae (0·51; 0·40-0·66) and N meningitidis (0·26; 0·21-0·31), while no significant changes were observed for S agalactiae (1·02; 0·75-1·40), which is not transmitted via the respiratory route. No major changes in the distribution of cases were observed when stratified by patient age or serotype or group. An estimated 36 289 (95% prediction interval 17 145-55 434) cases of invasive bacterial disease were averted during the first 2 years of the pandemic among IRIS-participating countries and territories. INTERPRETATION COVID-19 containment measures were associated with a sustained decrease in the incidence of invasive disease caused by S pneumoniae, H influenzae, and N meningitidis during the first 2 years of the pandemic, but cases began to increase in some countries towards the end of 2021 as pandemic restrictions were lifted. These IRIS data provide a better understanding of microbial transmission, will inform vaccine development and implementation, and can contribute to health-care service planning and provision of policies. FUNDING Wellcome Trust, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency, Torsten Söderberg Foundation, Stockholm County Council, Swedish Research Council, German Federal Ministry of Health, Robert Koch Institute, Pfizer, Merck, and the Greek National Public Health Organization
    corecore