Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy logoLink to Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
. 1993 Jul;37(7):1531–1535. doi: 10.1128/aac.37.7.1531

Use of cephalosporins for prophylaxis and therapy of polymicrobial infection in mice.

I Brook 1
PMCID: PMC188007  PMID: 8363386

Abstract

Cefoxitin, cefotetan, and cefmetazole were compared in 10-day therapy of intra-abdominal and subcutaneous infections caused by three organisms: Bacteroides fragilis and Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron combined with either Escherichia coli or Staphylococcus aureus. Intra-abdominal infection was caused by B. fragilis plus B. thetaiotaomicron plus E. coli. Therapy was initiated immediately before inoculation or was delayed for 8 h. Mortality was 14 of 30 (47%) for saline-treated mice, and all survivors developed abscesses. Immediate therapy reduced mortality and the percentage of mice with abscesses (in survivors), respectively, to 17 and 20% with cefoxitin, 0 and 13% with cefotetan, and 0 and 17% with cefmetazole, and the numbers of all bacteria were reduced by all the cephalosporins. Delayed therapy reduced mortality and abscess formation, respectively, to 20 and 8% of mice with cefoxitin, 10 and 93% with cefotetan, and 7 and 96% with cefmetazole. B. thetaiotaomicron survived in all abscesses treated with cefotetan and cefmetazole. Subcutaneous abscesses were caused by each organism alone or in combinations of one aerobe (S. aureus or E. coli) and one or two Bacteroides species. Early therapy reduced the numbers of all bacteria independent of their in vitro susceptibility. All agents reduced the number of each Bacteroides species with either E. coli or S. aureus. However, when therapy was delayed, cefotetan and cefmetazole were less effective than cefoxitin against B. thetaiotaomicron. Cefotetan was the most active agent against E. coli, and cefmetazole was the most effective against S. aureus. These data illustrate the efficacy of all tested cephalosporins in the prophylaxis of polymicrobial infections.

Full text

PDF
1531

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., 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]
  2. Barry A. L. Criteria for in vitro susceptibility testing of cefotetan. Correlations with clinical and bacteriologic responses. Am J Surg. 1988 May 31;155(5A):24–29. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9610(88)80208-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Brook I., Coolbaugh J. C., Walker R. I. Pathogenicity of piliated and encapsulated Bacteroides fragilis. Eur J Clin Microbiol. 1984 Jun;3(3):207–209. doi: 10.1007/BF02014880. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Brook I. Enhancement of growth of aerobic and facultative bacteria in mixed infections with Bacteroides species. Infect Immun. 1985 Dec;50(3):929–931. doi: 10.1128/iai.50.3.929-931.1985. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Brook I., Frazier E. H. Aerobic and anaerobic bacteriology of wounds and cutaneous abscesses. Arch Surg. 1990 Nov;125(11):1445–1451. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.1990.01410230039007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Brook I., Hunter V., Walker R. I. Synergistic effect of bacteroides, Clostridium, Fusobacterium, anaerobic cocci, and aerobic bacteria on mortality and induction of subcutaneous abscesses in mice. J Infect Dis. 1984 Jun;149(6):924–928. doi: 10.1093/infdis/149.6.924. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Brook I. In vitro susceptibility and in vivo efficacy of antimicrobials in the treatment of Bacteroides fragilis-Escherichia coli infection in mice. J Infect Dis. 1989 Oct;160(4):651–656. doi: 10.1093/infdis/160.4.651. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Brook I. Inoculum effect. Rev Infect Dis. 1989 May-Jun;11(3):361–368. doi: 10.1093/clinids/11.3.361. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Brook I., Walker R. I. Infectivity of organisms recovered from polymicrobial abscesses. Infect Immun. 1983 Dec;42(3):986–989. doi: 10.1128/iai.42.3.986-989.1983. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Cornick N. A., Cuchural G. J., Jr, Snydman D. R., Jacobus N. V., Iannini P., Hill G., Cleary T., O'Keefe J. P., Pierson C., Finegold S. M. The antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of the Bacteroides fragilis group in the United States, 1987. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1990 Jun;25(6):1011–1019. doi: 10.1093/jac/25.6.1011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Cornick N. A., Jacobus N. V., Gorbach S. L. Activity of cefmetazole against anaerobic bacteria. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1987 Dec;31(12):2010–2012. doi: 10.1128/aac.31.12.2010. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. File T. M., Jr, Thomson R. B., Jr, Tan J. S., Salstrom S. J., Jacobs G. A., Johnson L., Tan L. In vitro susceptibility of the Bacteroides fragilis group in community hospitals. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 1986 Nov;5(4):317–322. doi: 10.1016/0732-8893(86)90035-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Jones R. N. Review of the in-vitro spectrum and characteristics of cefmetazole (CS-1170). J Antimicrob Chemother. 1989 Apr;23 (Suppl 500):1–12. doi: 10.1093/jac/23.suppl_d.1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Kasper D. L. The polysaccharide capsule of Bacteroides fragilis subspecies fragilis: immunochemical and morphologic definition. J Infect Dis. 1976 Jan;133(1):79–87. doi: 10.1093/infdis/133.1.79. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Neu H. C. The new beta-lactamase-stable cephalosporins. Ann Intern Med. 1982 Sep;97(3):408–419. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-97-3-408. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Plouffe J. F. Cefmetazole versus cefoxitin in prevention of infections after abdominal surgery. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1989 Apr;23 (Suppl 500):85–88. doi: 10.1093/jac/23.suppl_d.85. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Sheikh W., Bobey D. G. Lack of predictability of cefotetan in vitro susceptibility tests against cefotetan-resistant anaerobic bacteria in determining clinical and bacteriologic efficacies. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 1992 Sep-Oct;15(7):595–600. doi: 10.1016/0732-8893(90)90036-u. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

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

RESOURCES