Skip to main content
Log in

Retrospective Resistance Pattern of Clinical Isolates In Vitro Against Imipenem and Other Antimicrobial Agents Between 1986 and 1989

  • Original Research Article
  • Published:
Drug Investigation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

The in vitro activity of imipenem and several other antibacterial agents (including broad spectrum penicillins, expanded spectrum cephalosporins, and fluoroquinolones) was assessed against 130 033 clinical isolates of Gram-negative aerobic bacteria, Gram-positive aerobic bacteria, and anaerobic bacteria, collected in Germany between 1986 and 1989. Overall, 97.4% of the isolates were inhibited by an imipenem concentration of 4 mg/L. Most isolates of Xanthomonas maltophilia and Pseudomonas cepacia were resistant to imipenem between 1986 and 1989. However, when these 2 species are excluded, the frequency of resistance of the remaining isolates is < 1% each for Gram-negative, Gram-positive, and anaerobic species, indicating a level of activity of imipenem greater than that of any of the 18 comparative antibacterial agents.

Despite extensive clinical use in Germany between 1986 and 1989, the activity of imipenem against all bacterial species remained virtually unchanged. Of particular note is the maintenance of activity against P. aeruginosa, with only 1% of 1197 isolates being resistant in 1989. In contrast, a trend to an increasing incidence of resistance of some species was seen with a few of the other antimicrobials: the aminoglycosides and mezlocillin (X. maltophilia and P. cepacia); mezlocillin, piperacillin, and cefoperazone (Serratia spp.); cefuroxime (Serratia spp, Morganella morganii, and Proteus vulgaris); flucloxacillin and ofloxacin (coagulase-negative staphylococci); and the fluoroquinolones (Bacteroides fragilis). However, the clinical significance of some of these trends is negligible.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Calandra G, Ricci R, Wang C, Brown K. Cross resistance and imipenem. Lancet 2: 340–341, 1986

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hallmann L, Burkhardt F. Klinische Mikrobiologie, pp. 49–163, Georg Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart, 1974

    Google Scholar 

  • Klietmann W, Focht J, Nösner K. Antibacterial effect of imipenem in vitro against important aerobic and anaerobic strains isolated from clinical specimens. Chemioterapia 6: 243–250, 1987

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kropp H, Sundelof JG, Kahan JS, Kahan FM, Birnbaum J. MK 0787 (N-formimidoyl thienamycin): evaluation of in vivo and in vitro activities. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 17: 993–1000, 1980

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lennette EH. The manual of clinical microbiology, pp. 154–472, American Society of Microbiology, Washington DC, 1985

    Google Scholar 

  • National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. Methods for dilution antimicrobial susceptibility tests for bacteria that grow aerobically: approved standard M7-A. NCCLS, Villanova, Pennsylvania, 1985a

    Google Scholar 

  • National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. Reference agar dilution procedure for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of anaerobic bacteria: approved standard M11-A. NCCLS, Villanova, Pennsylvania, 1985b

    Google Scholar 

  • Nilsson L, Nilsson M, Jendle J. Subpopulations of variants resistant to imipenem in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 22: 643–649, 1988

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Quinn JP, Studemeister AE, DiVincenzo CA, Lerner SA. Resistance to imipenem in Pseudomonas aeruginosa: clinical experience and biochemical mechanisms. Reviews of Infectious Diseases 10: 892–898, 1988

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vallée E, Joly-Guillou ML, Bergogne-Berezin E. Activité comparative de l’imipénème, du céfotaxime et de la ceftazidime vis-à-vis d’Acinetobacter calcoaceticus. Presse Médicale 19: 588–591, 1990

    Google Scholar 

  • Werner H. Anaerobier-Infektionene, pp 129–170, Georg Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart, 1985a

    Google Scholar 

  • Werner H. In-vitro Aktivität von Penicillinen gegen Anaerobier. Fortschritte der antimikrobiellen und antineoplastischen Chemotherapie 4: 1293–1308, 1985b

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Klietmann, W., Focht, J. & Nösner, K. Retrospective Resistance Pattern of Clinical Isolates In Vitro Against Imipenem and Other Antimicrobial Agents Between 1986 and 1989. Drug Invest. 3, 270–277 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03259577

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03259577

Keywords

Navigation