Comparing in vitro antibacterial behaviors of carbapenems against Pseudomonas aeruginosa

Abstract

Abstract: AIM: To compare the antibacterial behaviors of carbapenems against Pseudomonas aeruginosa, including the in vitro antibacterial activity and the morphological changes of bacterium.METHODS: In vitro the sensitivity of different antibiotics against P. aeruginosa were determined by standard KB method and agar dilution method on Mueller-Hinton (MH)agar, dilutedMH agar (1:16)and Minimum Medium (MM) agar.The bacterial morphological changes after incubating with different antibiotics were observed with electronic microscope.RESULTS: 14 % clinical isolates of P.aeruginosa show double-circle phenomena around meropenenm disc.The MIC values of panipenem were higher than those in imipenem and moropenem on MH agar, while decreased 8-16 times on MM agar. Imipenem and panipenem induced bacterial cell ovoid formation, ceftazidime induced bacterial filamentous elongation and lower concentration meropenem led bacterial cell fusiform change.CONCLUSION: In vitro antibacterial activity of panipenem was affected by the medium type and lower basic amino acid concentration medium favored its bactericidal effect.Meropenem did not have complete bactericidal effect and more bacterial endotoxin could be released at lower drug concentration.

Key words: Pseudomonas aeruginosa, carbapenem, antibacterial activity in vitro, morphology

CLC Number:

R965.2

WANG Jin, WANG Zhe, LIU Jian, LIU Yuan-chen, XIAO Yong-hong. Comparing in vitro antibacterial behaviors of carbapenems against Pseudomonas aeruginosa[J]. Chinese Journal of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 2009, 14(12): 1356-1360.

References

[1] 徐淑云, 卞如濂, 陈修.主编.抗菌药物实验方法, 药理实验方法学[M].3 版.人民卫生出版社, 中国临床药理学与治疗学 2009 Dec;14(12) · 1359 · 2002:1662-1663.
[2] 汪复, 张婴元.主编.实用抗感染治疗学[M].人民卫生出版社, 2004:21-22.
[3] 王涛, 主编.生物医学中超微结构与电子显微镜技术[M].科学技术出版社, 1980:157-170.
[4] 李家泰, 李耘, 王进.中国重症监护病房细菌耐药性监测研究[J].中华检验医学杂志, 2004, 27(11): 733-738.
[5] 王玉萍, 李小宁, 王明华, 等.ICU 标本细菌培养结果及耐药性分析[J].中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2009, 13(6):691-694.
[6] Xiao YH, Wang J, Li Y.Bacteria resistance surveillance in China[J].E JMicrobiol Infect Dis, 2008, 27(8):697-708.
[7] Muneo H, Sayaka T, Kouju I.Comparative antibacterial activity of carbapenems against Pseudomonas aeruginosa[J].Jpn J Antibiot, 2003, 56(6):144-150.
[8] Okamoto K, Gotoh N, Nishino T.Alterations of susceptibility of Pseudomonas aeruginosa by overproduction of multidrug efflux systems, MexAB-OprM, MexCD-OprJ, and MexXY OprM to carbapenems:substrate specificities of the efflux systems[J].J Infect Chemother, 2002, 8(4): 371-373.
[9] White R, Friedrich L, Burgess D, et al.Comparative in vitro pharmacodynamics of imipenem and meropenem against Pseudomonas aeruginosa[J].Antimicrob Agent Chemother, 1996, 40(4):904-908.
[10] 杨帆, 张婴元, 郑丽叶.帕尼培南-倍他米隆的临床评价[J].中华内科杂志, 2000, 39(2):107-110.
[11] Muramatsu H, Horii T, Morita M.Effect of basic amino acids on susceptibility to carbapenems in clinical Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates[J].Int J MedMicrobiol, 2003, 293(2 3):191-197.
[12] Tsuji M, Matsuda H, Miwa H.Antimicrobial-induced release of endotoxin from Pseudomonas aeruginosa:comparison of in vitro and animal models[J].J Antimicrob Chemother, 2003, 51(2):353-359