嗜麦芽寡养单胞菌对头孢他啶-阿维巴坦联合用药与头孢他啶单药治疗的敏感性比较。
Stenotrophomonas maltophilia susceptibility to ceftazidime-avibactam combination versus ceftazidime alone.
机构信息
Laboratoire de bactériologie, CHU, Angers, France.
Laboratoire de bactériologie, CHU, Angers, France; Inserm, CRCINA, université de Nantes, université d'Angers, Angers, France; Inserm, équipe ATIP AVENIR, CRCINA, université de Nantes, université d'Angers, Angers, France.
出版信息
Med Mal Infect. 2020 May;50(3):305-307. doi: 10.1016/j.medmal.2020.01.003. Epub 2020 Jan 31.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC) of the ceftazidime-avibactam (CZA) combination versus ceftazidime alone (TZ) for Stenotrophomonas maltophilia.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
MIC comparison was performed by E-tests. We assumed that CZA was more effective in vitro than TZ alone when CZA led to a category change from "Resistant" with TZ alone to "Susceptible" or "Intermediate" with CZA, or if the MIC of CZA was at least 4-fold lower than the MIC of TZ for TZ-susceptible isolates.
RESULTS
For the 54 clinical isolates included in the study, CZA showed better results in terms of the proportion of susceptible isolates (66.7% vs. 38.9%, P<0.01), MIC (2μg/mL vs. 12μg/mL, P<0.05), and MIC distribution. According to our definition, CZA was also more effective in vitro than TZ alone for 50% of the isolates.
CONCLUSION
Using CZA for empirical treatments in severe or polymicrobial infections with S. maltophilia seems appropriate.
目的
比较头孢他啶-阿维巴坦（CZA）合剂与头孢他啶（TZ）单独用药对嗜麦芽窄食单胞菌的最低抑菌浓度（MIC）。
患者与方法
采用 E 试验进行 MIC 比较。我们假设当 CZA 导致 TZ 单独用药时的“耐药”类别发生变化，变为“敏感”或“中介”，或者当 CZA 的 MIC 至少比 TZ 对 TZ 敏感分离株的 MIC 低 4 倍时，CZA 在体外比 TZ 单独用药更有效。
结果
在研究中包括的 54 株临床分离株中，CZA 在敏感分离株的比例（66.7%比 38.9%，P<0.01）、MIC（2μg/mL 比 12μg/mL，P<0.05）和 MIC 分布方面表现出更好的结果。根据我们的定义，CZA 对 50%的分离株在体外也比 TZ 单独用药更有效。
结论
在严重或混合感染嗜麦芽窄食单胞菌的情况下，使用 CZA 进行经验性治疗似乎是合适的。
Zotero 插件