Skip to main content
PMC home page
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy logoLink to Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
. 1997 Apr;41(4):767–770. doi: 10.1128/aac.41.4.767

Activities of beta-lactams against Acinetobacter genospecies as determined by agar dilution and E-test MIC methods.

M A Visalli 1, M R Jacobs 1, T D Moore 1, F A Renzi 1, P C Appelbaum 1
PMCID: PMC163791  PMID: 9087486

Abstract

The agar dilution MIC method was used to test activities of ticarcillin, ticarcillin-clavulanate, amoxicillin, amoxicillin-clavulanate, ampicillin, ampicillin-sulbactam, piperacillin, piperacillin-tazobactam, inhibitors alone, ceftazidime, and imipenem against 237 Acinetobacter genospecies. A total of 93.2% of strains were beta-lactamase positive by the chromogenic cephalosporin method. Overall, ampicillin-sulbactam was the most active combination against all strains (MIC at which 50% of the isolates are inhibited [MIC50] and MIC90, 4.0 and 32.0 microg/ml; 86.9% susceptible at < or = 16 microg/ml), followed by ticarcillin-clavulanate (16.0 and 128.0 microg/ml; 85.7% susceptible at < or = 64 microg/ml), piperacillin-tazobactam (16.0 and 128.0 microg/ml; 84.8% susceptible at < or = 64 microg/ml), and amoxicillin-clavulanate (16.0 and 64.0 microg/ml; 54.4% susceptible at < or =16 microg/ml). Ceftazidime and imipenem yielded MIC50s and MIC90s of 8.0 and 64.0 microg/ml (ceftazidime) and 0.5 and 1.0 microg/ml (imipenem), respectively; 71.3% of strains were susceptible to ceftazidime at < or = 16 microg/ml, and 99.2% were susceptible to imipenem at < or = 8 microg/ml. Sulbactam was the most active beta-lactamase inhibitor alone (MIC50 and MIC90, 2.0 and 16.0 microg/ml); clavulanate and tazobactam were less active (16.0 and 32.0 microg/ml for both compounds). Enhancement of beta-lactams by beta-lactamase inhibitors was not always seen in beta-lactamase-positive strains, and activity of combinations such as ampicillin-sulbactam was due to the inhibitor alone. Acinetobacter baumannii was the most resistant genospecies. By contrast, Acinetobacter haemolyticus, Acinetobacter calcoaceticus, Acinetobacter johnsonii, Acinetobacter junii, Acinetobacter radioresistens, and other non-Acinetobacter baumannii strains were more susceptible to all compounds tested. E-test MICs were within 1 dilution of agar dilution MICs in 38.4 to 89.6% of cases and within 2 dilutions in 61.6 to 98.6% of cases.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (187.6 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Appelbaum P. C., Spangler S. K., Sollenberger L. Susceptibility of non-fermentative gram-negative bacteria to ciprofloxacin, norfloxacin, amifloxacin, pefloxacin and cefpirome. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1986 Dec;18(6):675–679. doi: 10.1093/jac/18.6.675. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Appelbaum P. C., Spangler S. K., Tamarree T. Susceptibility of 310 nonfermentative gram-negative bacteria to aztreonam, carumonam, ciprofloxacin, ofloxacin and fleroxacin. Chemotherapy. 1988;34(1):40–45. doi: 10.1159/000238546. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Appelbaum P. C., Tamim J., Pankuch G. A., Aber R. C. Susceptibility of 324 nonfermentative gram-negative rods to 6 cephalosporins and azthreonam. Chemotherapy. 1983;29(5):337–344. doi: 10.1159/000238217. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Appelbaum P. C., Tamim J., Stavitz J., Aber R. C., Pankuch G. A. Sensitivity of 341 non-fermentative gram-negative bacteria to seven beta-lactam antibiotics. Eur J Clin Microbiol. 1982 Jun;1(3):159–165. doi: 10.1007/BF02019617. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Bergogne-Berezin E., Joly-Guillou M. L. An underestimated nosocomial pathogen, Acinetobacter calcoaceticus. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1985 Nov;16(5):535–538. doi: 10.1093/jac/16.5.535. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Bergogne-Berezin E., Joly-Guillou M. L. Comparative activity of imipenem, ceftazidime and cefotaxime against Acinetobacter calcoaceticus. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1986 Dec;18 (Suppl E):35–39. doi: 10.1093/jac/18.supplement_e.35. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Fass R. J., Barnishan J. In vitro susceptibilities of nonfermentative gram-negative bacilli other than Pseudomonas aeruginosa to 32 antimicrobial agents. Rev Infect Dis. 1980 Nov-Dec;2(6):841–853. doi: 10.1093/clinids/2.6.841. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Hoban D. J., Jones R. N., Yamane N., Frei R., Trilla A., Pignatari A. C. In vitro activity of three carbapenem antibiotics. Comparative studies with biapenem (L-627), imipenem, and meropenem against aerobic pathogens isolated worldwide. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 1993 Nov-Dec;17(4):299–305. doi: 10.1016/0732-8893(93)90039-a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Husson M. O., Izard D., Bouillet L., Leclerc H. Comparative in-vitro activity of ciprofloxacin against non-fermenters. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1985 Apr;15(4):457–462. doi: 10.1093/jac/15.4.457. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Joly-Guillou M. L., Bergogne-Bérézin E., Moreau N. Enzymatic resistance to beta-lactams and aminoglycosides in Acinetobacter calcoaceticus. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1987 Dec;20(6):773–776. doi: 10.1093/jac/20.6.773. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Kitzis M. D., Goldstein F. W., Labia R., Acar J. F. Activité du sulbactam et de l'acide clavulanique, seuls et associés, sur Acinetobacter calcoaceticus. Ann Microbiol (Paris) 1983 Mar-Apr;134A(2):163–168. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Kuah B. G., Kumarasinghe G., Doran J., Chang H. R. Antimicrobial susceptibilities of clinical isolates of Acinetobacter baumannii from Singapore. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1994 Oct;38(10):2502–2503. doi: 10.1128/aac.38.10.2502. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Lortholary O., Fagon J. Y., Hoi A. B., Slama M. A., Pierre J., Giral P., Rosenzweig R., Gutmann L., Safar M., Acar J. Nosocomial acquisition of multiresistant Acinetobacter baumannii: risk factors and prognosis. Clin Infect Dis. 1995 Apr;20(4):790–796. doi: 10.1093/clinids/20.4.790. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. MacGowan A. P., Bowker K. E., Bedford K. A., Holt H. A., Reeves D. S., Hedges A. The comparative inhibitory and bactericidal activities of meropenem and imipenem against Acinetobacter spp. and Enterobacteriaceae resistant to second generation cephalosporins. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1995 Feb;35(2):333–337. doi: 10.1093/jac/35.2.333. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Obana Y., Nishino T. In-vitro and in-vivo activities of sulbactam and YTR830H against Acinetobacter calcoaceticus. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1990 Nov;26(5):677–682. doi: 10.1093/jac/26.5.677. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Obara M., Nakae T. Mechanisms of resistance to beta-lactam antibiotics in Acinetobacter calcoaceticus. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1991 Dec;28(6):791–800. doi: 10.1093/jac/28.6.791. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Rolston K. V., Bodey G. P. In vitro susceptibility of Acinetobacter species to various antimicrobial agents. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1986 Nov;30(5):769–770. doi: 10.1128/aac.30.5.769. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Sato K., Nakae T. Outer membrane permeability of Acinetobacter calcoaceticus and its implication in antibiotic resistance. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1991 Jul;28(1):35–45. doi: 10.1093/jac/28.1.35. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Seifert H., Baginski R., Schulze A., Pulverer G. Antimicrobial susceptibility of Acinetobacter species. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1993 Apr;37(4):750–753. doi: 10.1128/aac.37.4.750. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Shalit I., Dan M., Gutman R., Gorea A., Berger S. A. Cross resistance to ciprofloxacin and other antimicrobial agents among clinical isolates of Acinetobacter calcoaceticus biovar anitratus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1990 Mar;34(3):494–495. doi: 10.1128/aac.34.3.494. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Simor A. E., Louie L., Louie M. In vitro susceptibility of Acinetobacter baumannii to biapenem, piperacillin/tazobactam and thirteen other antimicrobial agents. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 1994 Jun;13(6):521–523. doi: 10.1007/BF01974651. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Suh B., Shapiro T., Jones R., Satishchandran V., Truant A. L. In vitro activity of beta-lactamase inhibitors against clinical isolates of Acinetobacter species. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 1995 Feb;21(2):111–114. doi: 10.1016/0732-8893(95)00020-b. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Tankovic J., Legrand P., De Gatines G., Chemineau V., Brun-Buisson C., Duval J. Characterization of a hospital outbreak of imipenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii by phenotypic and genotypic typing methods. J Clin Microbiol. 1994 Nov;32(11):2677–2681. doi: 10.1128/jcm.32.11.2677-2681.1994. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Tilley P. A., Roberts F. J. Bacteremia with Acinetobacter species: risk factors and prognosis in different clinical settings. Clin Infect Dis. 1994 Jun;18(6):896–900. doi: 10.1093/clinids/18.6.896. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Urban C., Go E., Mariano N., Berger B. J., Avraham I., Rubin D., Rahal J. J. Effect of sulbactam on infections caused by imipenem-resistant Acinetobacter calcoaceticus biotype anitratus. J Infect Dis. 1993 Feb;167(2):448–451. doi: 10.1093/infdis/167.2.448. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Vallée E., Joly-Guillou M. L., Bergogne-Berezin E. Activité comparative de l'imipénème, du céfotaxime et de la ceftazidime vis-à-vis d'Acinetobacter calcoaceticus. Presse Med. 1990 Apr 4;19(13):588–591. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. von Graevenitz A., Bucher C. The effect of N-formimidoyl thienamycin, ceftazidime, cefotiam, ceftriaxone and cefotaxime on non-fermentative Gram-negative rods, Aeromonas, Plesiomonas and Enterobacter agglomerans. Infection. 1982 Sep-Oct;10(5):293–298. doi: 10.1007/BF01640878. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy are provided here courtesy of American Society for Microbiology (ASM)

RESOURCES