Skip to main content
PMC home page
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy logoLink to Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
. 1990 Jan;34(1):179–181. doi: 10.1128/aac.34.1.179

Comparison of in vitro antibiograms of Bacteroides fragilis group isolates: differences in resistance rates in two institutions because of differences in susceptibility testing methodology.

K E Aldridge 1, H M Wexler 1, C V Sanders 1, S M Finegold 1
PMCID: PMC171547  PMID: 2327757

Abstract

With 120 clinical isolates of the Bacteroides fragilis group, a comparison of rates of resistance to selected antimicrobial agents by using two susceptibility tests was performed in two medical institutions. The broth microdilution method produced MICs significantly lower than those determined by the agar dilution method. With ceftizoxime and cefoxitin, 88 and 18%, respectively, of the MICs were greater than or equal to 2 twofold dilutions apart. These differences in MIC results produced major interpretive discrepancies for ceftizoxime and cefoxitin, whereas no significant differences in resistance rates were noted for clindamycin and metronidazole.

Full text

PDF
179

Selected References

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

  1. Aldridge K. E., Sanders C. V. Antibiotic- and method-dependent variation in susceptibility testing results of Bacteroides fragilis group isolates. J Clin Microbiol. 1987 Dec;25(12):2317–2321. doi: 10.1128/jcm.25.12.2317-2321.1987. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Aldridge K. E., Sanders C. V., Janney A., Faro S., Marier R. L. Comparison of the activities of penicillin G and new beta-lactam antibiotics against clinical isolates of Bacteroides species. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1984 Sep;26(3):410–413. doi: 10.1128/aac.26.3.410. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bourgault A. M., Harding G. K., Smith J. A., Horsman G. B., Marrie T. J., Lamothe F. Survey of anaerobic susceptibility patterns in Canada. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1986 Nov;30(5):798–801. doi: 10.1128/aac.30.5.798. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Dubreuil L., Devos J., Neut C., Romond C. Susceptibility of anaerobic bacteria from several French hospitals to three major antibiotics. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1984 Jun;25(6):764–766. doi: 10.1128/aac.25.6.764. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Fass R. J. Comparative in vitro activities of third-generation cephalosporins. Arch Intern Med. 1983 Sep;143(9):1743–1745. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Greenwood D., Pearson N., Eley A., O'Grady F. Comparative in vitro activities of cefotaxime and ceftizoxime (FK749): new cephalosporins with exceptional potency. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1980 Mar;17(3):397–401. doi: 10.1128/aac.17.3.397. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Gutiérrez-Núez J., Harrington P. T., Ramirez-Ronda C. H. Activity of N-formimidoyl thienamycin and cephalosporins against isolates from nosocomially acquired bacteremia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1982 Mar;21(3):509–512. doi: 10.1128/aac.21.3.509. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Harding G. K., Nicolle L. E., Haase D. A., Aoki F. Y., Stiver H. G., Blanchard R. J., Kirkpatrick J. R. Prospective, randomized, comparative trials in the therapy for intraabdominal and female genital tract infections. Rev Infect Dis. 1984 Mar-Apr;6 (Suppl 1):S283–S292. doi: 10.1093/clinids/6.supplement_1.s283. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Heseltine P. N., Busch D. F., Meyer R. D., Finegold S. M. Cefoxitin: clinical evaluation in thirty-eight patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1977 Mar;11(3):427–434. doi: 10.1128/aac.11.3.427. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Jones R. N., Barry A. L., Fuchs P. C., Allen S. D. Ceftizoxime and cefoxitin susceptibility testing against anaerobic bacteria: comparison of results from three NCCLS methods and quality control recommendations for the reference agar dilution procedure. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 1987 Oct;8(2):87–94. doi: 10.1016/0732-8893(87)90154-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Kirby B. D., Busch D. F., Citron D. M., Finegold S. M. Cefoxitin for treatment of infections due to anaerobic bacteria. Rev Infect Dis. 1979 Jan-Feb;1(1):113–117. doi: 10.1093/clinids/1.1.113. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Muytjens H. L., van der Ros-van de Repe J. Comparative activities of 13 beta-lactam antibiotics. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1982 Jun;21(6):925–934. doi: 10.1128/aac.21.6.925. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Rolfe R. D., Finegold S. M. Comparative in vitro activity of new beta-lactam antibiotics against anaerobic bacteria. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1981 Nov;20(5):600–609. doi: 10.1128/aac.20.5.600. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Tally F. P., Cuchural G. J., Jr, Jacobus N. V., Gorbach S. L., Aldridge K., Cleary T., Finegold S. M., Hill G., Iannini P., O'Keefe J. P. Nationwide study of the susceptibility of the Bacteroides fragilis group in the United States. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1985 Nov;28(5):675–677. doi: 10.1128/aac.28.5.675. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Wexler H. M., Finegold S. M. Antimicrobial resistance in Bacteroides. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1987 Feb;19(2):143–146. doi: 10.1093/jac/19.2.143. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

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

RESOURCES