4.7 Article

In vitro activities of ramoplanin, teicoplanin, vancomycin, linezolid, bacitracin, and four other antimicrobials against intestinal anaerobic bacteria

期刊

ANTIMICROBIAL AGENTS AND CHEMOTHERAPY
卷 47, 期 7, 页码 2334-2338

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/AAC.47.7.2334-2338.2003

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

By using an agar dilution method, the in vitro activities of ramoplanin, teicoplanin, vancomycin, linezolid, and five other agents were determined against 300 gram-positive and 54 gram-negative strains of intestinal anaerobes. Ramoplanin was active at 2 mug/ml against 287 of 300 (95.7%) gram-positive organisms, including 18 strains of Clostridium difficile for which MICs of ramoplanin were 0.25 to 0.5 mug/ml; for 3 of these, linezolid MICs were 8 to 16 mug/ml. Nineteen Clostridium innocuum strains for which the vancomycin MIC at which 90% of strains were inhibited was 16 mug/ml were susceptible to ramoplanin at 0.06 to 0.25 mug/ml and to teicoplanin at 0.125 to 1.0 mug/ml. All strains of Eubacterium, Actinomyces, Propionibacterium, and Peptostreptococcus spp. were inhibited by less than or equal to0.25 mug of ramoplanin per ml and less than or equal to1 mug of vancomycin per ml. Ramoplanin was also active at less than or equal to4 mug/ml against 15 of 22 of the Prevotella and Porphyromonas strains tested, but ramoplanin MICs for all 31 strains of the Bacteroides fragilis group, the Fusobacterium mortiferum-Fusobacterium varium group, and Veillonella spp. were greater than or equal to256 mug/ml. Ramoplanin displays excellent activity against C. difficile and other gram-positive enteric anaerobes, including vancomycin-resistant strains; however, it has poor activity against most gram-negative anaerobes and thus potentially has a lesser effect on the ecological balance of normal fecal flora.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据