Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy logoLink to Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
. 1992 Jun;36(6):1256–1262. doi: 10.1128/aac.36.6.1256

Teicoplanin versus vancomycin for prophylaxis of experimental Enterococcus faecalis endocarditis in rats.

J M Entenza 1, T Calandra 1, Y Moosmann 1, R Malinverni 1, M P Glauser 1
PMCID: PMC190328  PMID: 1416824

Abstract

Teicoplanin was compared with vancomycin for the prophylaxis of experimental Enterococcus faecalis endocarditis in rats. Single intravenous doses of teicoplanin (7 mg/kg of body weight) or vancomycin (15 mg/kg) were given 30 min before bacterial challenge. Two strains of E. faecalis (309 and 1209) isolated from patients with endocarditis were tested. Bacterial inocula ranged from 10(4) (i.e., the inoculum infecting 90% of the control rats [ID90]) to 10(7) CFU/ml. The MICs and MBCs of teicoplanin and vancomycin were, respectively, 0.25 to greater than 128 mg/liter and 2 to greater than 128 mg/liter for strain 309 and 0.5 to greater than 128 mg/liter and 0.5 to greater than 128 mg/liter for strain 1209. Vancomycin prevented endocarditis only in 60% (strain 309) and in 87% (strain 1209) of rats challenged with the smallest bacterial-inoculum size (ID90), whereas teicoplanin prevented endocarditis in 100% of rats challenged with the same inoculum (strain 309; P = 0.05), in 87% of rats challenged with 10 times the ID90 (strain 309; P = 0.02), and in 95% of rats challenged with 100 times the ID90 (strain 1209; P = 0.0003). The combination of teicoplanin plus gentamicin (4 mg/kg) extended the protection to inocula 100 times the ID90 (strain 309; 96% of sterile animals) and 1,000 times the ID90 (strain 1209; 100% of sterile animals). Prevention of endocarditis was likely to be due to a prolonged inhibition of bacterial growth by sustained levels of teicoplanin in serum and not to bacterial killing. Indeed, teicoplanin did not exhibit any bactericidal activity either in vitro (time-kill curves) or in vivo (serum bactericidal activity). Teicoplanin proved to be superior to vancomycin in the prophylaxis of experimental E. faecalis endocarditis in rats.

Full text

PDF
1256

Selected References

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

  1. Bernard J. P., Francioli P., Glauser M. P. Vancomycin prophylaxis of experimental Streptococcus sanguis. Inhibition of bacterial adherence rather than bacterial killing. J Clin Invest. 1981 Oct;68(4):1113–1116. doi: 10.1172/JCI110337. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Cremieux A. C., Maziere B., Vallois J. M., Ottaviani M., Azancot A., Raffoul H., Bouvet A., Pocidalo J. J., Carbon C. Evaluation of antibiotic diffusion into cardiac vegetations by quantitative autoradiography. J Infect Dis. 1989 May;159(5):938–944. doi: 10.1093/infdis/159.5.938. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Francioli P., Moreillon P., Glauser M. P. Comparison of single doses of amoxicillin or of amoxicillin-gentamicin for the prevention of endocarditis caused by Streptococcus faecalis and by viridans streptococci. J Infect Dis. 1985 Jul;152(1):83–89. doi: 10.1093/infdis/152.1.83. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Glauser M. P., Bernard J. P., Moreillon P., Francioli P. Successful single-dose amoxicillin prophylaxis against experimental streptococcal endocarditis: evidence for two mechanisms of protection. J Infect Dis. 1983 Mar;147(3):568–575. doi: 10.1093/infdis/147.3.568. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Gorzynski E. A., Amsterdam D., Beam T. R., Jr, Rotstein C. Comparative in vitro activities of teicoplanin, vancomycin, oxacillin, and other antimicrobial agents against bacteremic isolates of gram-positive cocci. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1989 Nov;33(11):2019–2022. doi: 10.1128/aac.33.11.2019. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Hindes R. G., Willey S. H., Eliopoulos G. M., Rice L. B., Eliopoulos C. T., Murray B. E., Moellering R. C., Jr Treatment of experimental endocarditis caused by a beta-lactamase-producing strain of Enterococcus faecalis with high-level resistance to gentamicin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1989 Jul;33(7):1019–1022. doi: 10.1128/aac.33.7.1019. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Malinverni R., Bille J., Glauser M. P. Single-dose rifampin prophylaxis for experimental endocarditis induced by high bacterial inocula of viridans streptococci. J Infect Dis. 1987 Jul;156(1):151–157. doi: 10.1093/infdis/156.1.151. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Malinverni R., Francioli P. B., Glauser M. P. Comparison of single and multiple doses of prophylactic antibiotics in experimental streptococcal endocarditis. Circulation. 1987 Aug;76(2):376–382. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.76.2.376. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Moellering R. C., Jr Pharmacokinetics of vancomycin. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1984 Dec;14 (Suppl 500):43–52. doi: 10.1093/jac/14.suppl_d.43. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Moreillon P., Francioli P., Overholser D., Meylan P., Glauser M. P. Mechanisms of successful amoxicillin prophylaxis of experimental endocarditis due to Streptococcus intermedius. J Infect Dis. 1986 Nov;154(5):801–807. doi: 10.1093/infdis/154.5.801. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Neu H. C., Labthavikul P. In vitro activity of teichomycin compared with those of other antibiotics. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1983 Sep;24(3):425–428. doi: 10.1128/aac.24.3.425. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Pallanza R., Berti M., Goldstein B. P., Mapelli E., Randisi E., Scotti R., Arioli V. Teichomycin: in-vitro and in-vivo evaluation in comparison with other antibiotics. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1983 May;11(5):419–425. doi: 10.1093/jac/11.5.419. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Parenti F., Beretta G., Berti M., Arioli V. Teichomycins, new antibiotics from Actinoplanes teichomyceticus Nov. Sp. I. Description of the producer strain, fermentation studies and biological properties. J Antibiot (Tokyo) 1978 Apr;31(4):276–283. doi: 10.7164/antibiotics.31.276. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Shulman S. T., Amren D. P., Bisno A. L., Dajani A. S., Durack D. T., Gerber M. A., Kaplan E. L., Millard H. D., Sanders W. E., Schwartz R. H. Prevention of Bacterial Endocarditis. A statement for health professionals by the Committee on Rheumatic Fever and Infective Endocarditis of the Council on Cardiovascular Disease in the Young. Circulation. 1984 Dec;70(6):1123A–1127A. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Siber G. R., Echeverria P., Smith A. L., Paisley J. W., Smith D. H. Pharmacokinetics of gentamicin in children and adults. J Infect Dis. 1975 Dec;132(6):637–651. doi: 10.1093/infdis/132.6.637. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Somma S., Gastaldo L., Corti A. Teicoplanin, a new antibiotic from Actinoplanes teichomyceticus nov. sp. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1984 Dec;26(6):917–923. doi: 10.1128/aac.26.6.917. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Stille W., Sietzen W., Dieterich H. A., Fell J. J. Clinical efficacy and safety of teicoplanin. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1988 Jan;21 (Suppl A):69–79. doi: 10.1093/jac/21.suppl_a.69. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Traina G. L., Bonati M. Pharmacokinetics of teicoplanin in man after intravenous administration. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm. 1984 Apr;12(2):119–128. doi: 10.1007/BF01059273. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Verbist L., Tjandramaga B., Hendrickx B., Van Hecken A., Van Melle P., Verbesselt R., Verhaegen J., De Schepper P. J. In vitro activity and human pharmacokinetics of teicoplanin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1984 Dec;26(6):881–886. doi: 10.1128/aac.26.6.881. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

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

RESOURCES