Sader H S, Mendes C M, Montelli A, Sampaio J, Segura A J, Kesselring G L, Costa L, Ribeiro J E, Mamizuka E, Mimiça I
Universidade Federal de São Paulo, Escola Paulista de Medicina, São Paulo.
Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992). 1998 Oct-Dec;44(4):283-8. doi: 10.1590/s0104-42301998000400006.
To evaluate the in vitro activity of the fourth-generation cephalosporin cefpirome in comparison to that of ceftazidime, ceftriaxone, cefotaxime and imipenem in a multicenter study involving nine hospitals from six cities (four States).
A total of 804 isolates from patients hospitalized in either intensive care units or Oncology/Hematology units was evaluated. The isolates were collected between June and November of 1995, i.e. before cefpirome became commercially available in Brazil, and susceptibility tested by broth microdilution following the NCCLS procedures. All isolates resistant to cefpirome were retested by E-test.
Against Enterobacteriaceae (n = 344), cefpirome demonstrated an activity 2 to 32-fold higher than that of the third-generation cephalosporins (TGCs) and similar to that of imipenem. The percentages of Enterobacteriaceae susceptible were: 88%, 69% and 96% for cefpirome, TGCs and imipenem, respectively. The cefpirome spectrum was greater or equal than that of imipenem against Citrobacter freundii, Enterobacter aerogenes, Morganella morganii and Serratia marcescens. Against Acinetobacter sp. (n = 77), cefpirome was slightly more active than ceftazidime; however, the percentages of isolates resistant to these compounds were high (84% and 88%, respectively). The activities of cefpirome, ceftazidime and imipenem were very similar against P. aeruginosa isolates (n = 128), with MIC50(mg/ml)/percent susceptible of 8/59%, 8/62% and 4/62% respectively. Against aerobic gram-positive bacteria, the cefpirome activity was 4 to 16-fold higher than that of TGCs but 2 to 8-fold lower than that of imipenem.
The results suggest that, in Brazil, cefpirome has a spectrum of activity which is higher than that of the TGCs against aerobic gram-negative (Enterobacteriaceae and non-Enterobacteriaceae) and gram-positive bacteria and similar to that of imipenem against some Enterobacteriaceae species and P. aeruginosa.
在一项涉及来自四个州六个城市九家医院的多中心研究中,评估第四代头孢菌素头孢匹罗与头孢他啶、头孢曲松、头孢噻肟和亚胺培南相比的体外活性。
共评估了804株从重症监护病房或肿瘤/血液科住院患者中分离出的菌株。这些菌株于1995年6月至11月收集,即头孢匹罗在巴西上市之前,并按照美国国家临床实验室标准化委员会(NCCLS)的程序通过肉汤微量稀释法进行药敏试验。所有对头孢匹罗耐药的菌株均通过E试验重新检测。
针对肠杆菌科细菌(n = 344),头孢匹罗的活性比第三代头孢菌素(TGCs)高2至32倍,与亚胺培南相似。肠杆菌科细菌对头孢匹罗、TGCs和亚胺培南敏感的百分比分别为88%、69%和96%。在针对弗氏柠檬酸杆菌、产气肠杆菌、摩根摩根菌和粘质沙雷菌时,头孢匹罗的抗菌谱大于或等于亚胺培南。针对不动杆菌属(n = 77),头孢匹罗的活性略高于头孢他啶;然而,对这些化合物耐药的菌株百分比很高(分别为84%和88%)。头孢匹罗、头孢他啶和亚胺培南对铜绿假单胞菌分离株(n = 128)的活性非常相似,其MIC50(mg/ml)/敏感百分比分别为8/59%、8/62%和4/62%。针对需氧革兰氏阳性菌,头孢匹罗的活性比TGCs高4至16倍,但比亚胺培南低2至8倍。
结果表明,在巴西,头孢匹罗对需氧革兰氏阴性菌(肠杆菌科和非肠杆菌科)和革兰氏阳性菌的抗菌谱比TGCs更广,对某些肠杆菌科细菌和铜绿假单胞菌的抗菌谱与亚胺培南相似。