Advertisement

Drugs

, Volume 48, Issue 5, pp 678–688 | Cite as

Multidrug-Resistant Enterococcus faecium

An Untreatable Nosocomial Pathogen
  • Richard V. SperaJr
  • Bruce F. Farber
Review Article

Summary

The prevalence of enterococci and nosocomial pathogens has increased over the past 15 years. They have become increasingly resistant to agents traditionally useful in the treatment of invasive diseases due to enterococci.

Vancomycin resistance, first described in clinical isolates in 1988, has disseminated worldwide. It is usually associated with high-level resistance to penicillins and aminoglycosides rendering the treatment of patients with vancomycin-resistant enterococci very difficult. Several investigators have reported mortality rates greater than 50% for vancomycin-resistant enterococcal bacteraemia. Risk factors associated with vancomycin-resistant enterococcal bacteraemia include prolonged hospital stay, neutropenia, prior oral or parenteral vancomycin use, and broad spectrum antibiotics.

Since there is no uniformly effective antimicrobial therapy for patients infected with vancomycin-resistant enterococci, preventing of the spread of infection with the rigorous application of barrier precautions and other infectious control techniques is of paramount importance.

Keywords

Vancomycin Glycopeptide Teicoplanin Daptomycin Antimicrob Agent 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Schalberg DR, Culver DH, Gaynes RR Major trends in the microbial etiology of nosocomial infection. Am J Med 1991; 1 Suppl. 3B: 72S–5SCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Murray BE. The life and times of the Enterococcus. Clin Microbiol Rev 1990; 3: 46–65PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Klare I, Rodloff AC, Wagner J, et al. Overproduction of a penicillin-binding protein is not the only mechanism of penicillin resistance in Enterococcus faecium. Antimicrob Agent Chemother 1992; 36: 783–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Murray BE. New aspects of antimicrobial resistance and the resulting therapeutic dilemmas. J Infect Dis 1991; 163: 1185–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rhinehart E, Smith NE, Wennersten C, et al. Rapid dissemination of beta-lactamase-producing, aminoglycoside-resistant Enterococcus faecalis among patients and staff on an infant-toddler surgical ward. N Engl J Med 1990; 323: 1814–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Handwerger S, Perlman DC, Altarac D, et al. Concomitant high-level vancomycin and penicillin resistance in clinical isolates of enterococci. Clin Infect Dis 1992; 14: 655–66PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Westenfelder GO, Paterson PY, Reisberg BE, et al. Vancomycin-streptomycin synergism in enterococcal endocarditis. JAMA 1973; 223: 37–40PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Weinstein AJ, Moellering RC. Penicillin and gentamicin therapy for enterococcal infections. JAMA 1973; 223: 1030–2PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tompsett R, Pizette M. Enterococcal endocarditis: lack of correlation between therapeutic results and antibiotic susceptibility tests. Arch Intern Med 1962; 109: 146–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wilson WR, Wilkowske CJ, Wright AJ, et al. Treatment of streptomycin-susceptible and streptomycin-resistant enterococcal endocarditis. Ann Intern Med 1984; 100: 816–23PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zimmerman RA, Moellering RC, Weinberg AN. Mechanism of resistance to antibiotic synergism in enterococci. J Bacteriol 1971; 105: 873–9Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Krogstad DJ, Korfhagen TR, Moellering RC, et al. Plasmid-me-diated resistance to antibiotic synergism in enterococci. J Clin Invest 1978; 61: 1645–53PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Krogstad DJ, Korfhagen TR, Moellering RC, et al. Aminogly-coside-inactivating enzymes in clinical isolates of Streptococcus faecalis. J Clin Invest 1978; 62: 480–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jacoby GA, Archer GL. New mechanisms of bacterial resistance to antimicrobial agents. N Engl J Med 1991; 324: 601–12PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Calderwood SA, Wennersten C, Moellering Jr RC, et al. Resistance to six aminoglycosidic-aminocyclitol antibiotics among enterococci: prevalence, evolution and relationship to synergism with penicillin. Antimicrob Agent Chemother 1977; 13: 401–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Uttley AHC, Collins CH, Naidoo J, et al. Vancomycin-resistant enterococci. Lancet 1988; 1: 57–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Leclerq R, Derlot E, Duval J, et al. Plasmid-mediated resistance to vancomycin and teicoplanin in Enterococcus faecium. N Engl J Med 1988; 319: 157–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gaynes R, Tenover F, Clark N, et al. Epidemiology of nosocomial enterococci [NE] resistant to vancomycin in the United States. Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 843]; 1993 October 17-20: New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Courvalin P. Resistance of enterococci to glycopeptides. Antimicrob Agent Chemother 1990; 34: 2291–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Arthur M, Courvalin P. Genetics and mechanism of glycopeptide resistance enterococci. Antimicrob Agent Chemother 1993; 37: 1563–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Arthur M, Molinas C, Depardieu F, et al. Characterization of Tn1546, a Tn3-related transposon conferring glycopeptide resistance by synthesis of depsipeptide precursors on Enterococcus faecium BM4147. J Bacteriol 1993; 175: 17–27Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Al-Obeid S, Collatz E, Guttman L. Mechanism of resistance to vancomycin in Enterococcus faecium D366 and Enterococcus faecalis A256. Antimicrob Agent and Chemother 1990; 34: 252–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Williamson R, Al-Obeid S, Shlaes JH, et al. Inducible resistance to vancomycin in Enterococcus faecium D366. J Infect Dis 1989; 159: 1059–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Vincent S, Knight RG, Green M, et al. Vancomycin susceptibility and identification of motile enterococci. J Clin Microbiol 1191; 29: 2335–7Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Arthur M, Molinas C, Dutka-Malen S, et al. A two-component regulatory system controls expression of high-level resistance to glycopeptides in Enterococcus species. Program and Abstracts of the 31st Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 992]; 1991 September 29–October 2: Chicago. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1991Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Arthur M, Molinas C, Courvalin P. The VanS-VanR two component regulatory system controls synthesis of depsipeptide peptidoglycari precursors in Enterococcus faecium BM4147. J Bacteriol 1992; 174: 2582–91PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Arthur M, Molinas C, Dutka-Malen S, et al. Structural relationship between the vancomycin resistance protein VanH and 2-hydroxycarbolylic acid dehydrogenase. Gene 1991; 103: 133–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Arthur M, Molinas C, Bugg TDH, et al. Evidence for in vivo incorporation of D-lactate into peptidoglycan precursors of vancomycin-resistant enterococci. Antimicrob Agent Chemother 1992; 36: 867–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Fold HS, Thauvin-Eliopauolos C, Moellering Jr RC, et al. Restriction analysis confirms DNA sequence heterogeneity between VanB, and VanB2 in moderate and high-level vancomycin-resistant enterococci. Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 121]; 1993 October 17–20: New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Quintiliani Jr R, Evers J, Courvalin R. The VanB gene confers various levels of self-transferable resistance to vancomycin in enterococci. J Infect Dis 1992; 167: 1220–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hayden MK, Trenholme GM, Schultz JE, et al. In vitro development of teicoplanin resistance in a VanB Enterococcus faecium. J Infect Dis 1993; 167: 1224–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Willey BM, Kreiswirth BN, Eisner B, et al. Hybridization of enterococcal species to VanA may no longer be predictive of teicoplanin resistance. Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 119]; 1993 October 17–20; New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Karanfil LV, Murphy M, Josephson A, et al. A cluster of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium in an intensive care unit. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1992; 13: 195–200PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Livornese LL, Dias S, Samel C, et al. Hospital-acquired infection with vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium by electronic thermometers. Ann Intern Med 1992; 117: 112–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Green M, Binczewski B, Pasculle AW, et al. Constitutively vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium resistant to synergistic beta-lactam combinations. Antimicrob Agent Chemother 1993; 37: 1238–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Landman D, Mcbarakai NK, Quale JM. Novel antibiotic regimens against Enterococcus faecium resistant to ampicillin vancomycin, and gentamicin. Antimicrob Agent Chemother 1993; 37: 1904–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Jones R, Forman W, O’Donnell J, Suh B. High-mortality associated with vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus bacteremia. Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 846]; 1993 October 17–20; New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Linden P, Pasculle AW, Kramer DJ, et al. Bacteremia with vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium (VREF). Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 848]; 1993 October 17–20: New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ceroonado E, Garcia-Leoni ME, Vicente T, et al. Vancomycin-resistant enterococci in a general hospital: a case-control study. Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 850]; 1993 October 17–20: New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Montecalvo MA, Tasca L, Patel P, et al. Experience with vancomycin and ampicillin-resistant enterccoccal bacteremia in 45 patients. Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 851]; 1993 October 17–20; New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Vasquez A, Lutfey M, Tucci L, Serrell F, Kreiswirth B, Simberkoff M. Clinical, microbiologic and epidemiologic evaluation of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium (VREF). Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antibmicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 852]; 1993 October 17–20: New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kaplan AH, Gilligan PH, Facklam RR. Recovery of resistant entero-cocci during vancomycin prophylaxis. J Clin Mircro-biol 1988; 26: 1216–18Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Van der Auwera P, Dufresne N, Grenier P, et al. Emergence of resistant (R) E. faecium and Coag Neg Staph (CNS) in fecal flora of volunteers (V) receiving oral teicoplanin (T). Program and Abstracts of the Proceedings of the 30th Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 258]: 1990 October 20–24: Atlanta. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1992Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Hariharan R, Nathan C, McMahon M, et al. Epidemiology of vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) in ICU patients. Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 849]; 1993 October 17–20: New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Green M, Barbadura K, Wagener W, et al. Outbreak of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) faecium among pediatric liver transplant recipients. Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 853]; 1993 October 17–20: New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Eliopoulos GM. Activity of antimicrobials alone and in combination against vancomycin resistant enterococci. Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy (Glycopeptide Resistance and the Cell Wall Symposium); 1993 October 17–20: New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Suh B, Shapiro T, Rhie S, et al. In vitro activity of fluoroquinolones against vancomycin-resistant enterococci. Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 1056]; 1993 October 17–20: New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Jones RN, Erwin ME, Enterococcus Study Group. Emerging multiply-resistant enterococci (MRE) among clinical isolates: prevalence data from 97 medical centers. Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 1052]; 1993 October 17–20: New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Eliopoulos GM, Wennersten CB, Cole GK, et al. Comparison of in vitro activity of BAYY3118 against clinical isolates of bacteria. Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 1468]; 1993 October 17–20: New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Cooper B, Robinson A, Freeman C, et al. Antimicrobial susceptibility of vancomycin-resistant enterococci. Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 1053]; October 17–20, 1993: New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Linden P, Pasculle AW, Manez R, et al. Utilization of novobiocin and ciprofloxacin for the treatment of serious infection due to vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium. Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 1027]; 1993 October 17–20: New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Malabarba A, Ciabutti R, Scotti R, et al. MDL 63,246: a new semisynthetic glycopeptide antibiotic active against highly glycopeptide resistant enterococci. Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 445]; 1993 October 17–20: New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Berti M, Arain T, Goldstein BP. Antimicrobial activity of MDL63246: a new semisynthetic glycopeptide antibiotic. Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 446]; 1993 October 17–20: New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Johnson CC, Taylor S, Pitsakis P, et al. Bactericidal activity of ramoplanin against antibiotic-resistant enterococci. Antimicrob Agent Chemother 1992; 36: 2342–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Collins LA, Eliopoulis GM, Wennersten CB, et al. In vitro activity of ramoplanin against vancomycin-resistant gram positive organisms. Antimicrob Agent Chemother 1993; 37: 1364–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Romeo B, Kaschube M, Cavenaghi L, et al. Repeated doses of ramoplanin orally administered to healthy male volunteers: tolerability, lack of absorption and effect on stool microflora. Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 448]; 1993 October 17–20: New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Collins L, Malanoski G, Wennersten C, et al. In vitro activity of RP59500, an injectable streptogramin antibiotic against vancomycin-resistant gram positive organisms. Program and Abstracts of the Proceedings of the 32nd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 1306]; 1992 October 11–14: Anaheim. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1992Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Scriven SR, Tyrrell G, Willey BM, et al. In vitro assessment of RP59500 (RP) against vancomycin-resistant enterococci. Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 1057]; 1993 October 17–20: New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Casewell MW, Sayed-Akhawani M, Wale M. In vitro activity of RP59500 against vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium also resistant to >512μg/ml of gentamicin. Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 1058]; 1993 October 17–20: New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Pasculle AW, Linden PK, McDevitt DA, et al. Susceptibility of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium (VREF) to alternative antimicrobial agents singly and in combination. Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 1060]; 1993 October 17–20: New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Weiss WJ, Jacabus NV, Petersen DJ, et al. In vitro activity of novel glycylglycine compounds against enterococci and methicillin resistant staphylococci. Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobials and Chemotherapy [abstract 432]; 1993 October 17–20: New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Chin NX, Wu JF, Huang HB, Nou H. In vitro activity of CL331002 and CL329998 compared to other tetracyclines. Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 434]; 1993 October 17–20: New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Goldstein FW, Kitzis KD, Acan JF. DMG-MINO and DMG-DMDOT: two tetracycline (TC) derivatives highly effective against tetracycline resistant (TC-R) gram-positive cocci. Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobials and Chemotherapy [abstract 435]; 1993 October 17–20: New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Eliopoulos GM, Wennersten CB, Cole GR, et al. Comparative activity of two glycylglycine against gram-positive bacterial isolates. Program and Abstracts of the the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 436]; 1993 October 17–20: New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Bauernfeind A, Jungwirth R. In vitro activity of everinomycin (EVE) in comparison with vancomycin and teiooplanin. Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference of Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 458]; 1993 October 17–20: New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Shlaes DM, Shlaes JH, Etta L, et al. SCH27899 (EVE), an everinomycin active against multiple-resistant (R) enterococci and staphylococci. Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 460]; 1993 October 17–20: New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Urban C, Mariano N, Mosinkasnipas K, et al. Comparative in vitro activity of SCH27899, a novel everinomycin. Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 463]; 1993 October 17–20: New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Chin NX, Neu HC. In vitro activity of SCH27899 against aerobic and anaerobic gram-positive bacteria, Haemophilus influenzae, and Moraxella. Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 465]; 1993 October 17–20: New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Boyce JM, Medeiras AA. In vitro activity of SCH27899 against multidrug-resistant gram positive cocci. Program and Abstracts of the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 46]; 1993 October 17–20: New Orleans. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Mobarakai N, Quale JM, Landman D. Bactericidal activity of peptide antibiotics against multidrug-resistant Enterococcus faecium. Antimicrob Agent Chemother 1994; 38: 385–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Shlaes CM, Etter L, Gutmann L. Synergistic killing of resistant enterococci of classes A B and C by combinations of vancomycin, penicillin, and gentamicin. Antimicrob Agent Chemother 1991; 35: 775–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Leclerq R, Bingo E, Su QH, et al. Effects of combinations of beta-lactams, daptomycin, gentamicin, and glycopeptide-resistant enterococci. Antimicrob Agent Chemother 1991; 35: 92–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Cercenado E, Eliopoulos CM, Wennersten CB, et al. Absence of synergistic activity between penicillin and vancomycin against highly vancomycin-resistant enterococci. Antimicrob Agent Chemother 1992; 36: 2201–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Unal S, Flokowitsch JE, Thomas LJ, et al. In vitro synergy between vancomycin and ciprofloxacin against Enterococcus faecium (EFC) and Enterococcus faecalis (EFL). Program and Abstracts of the 31st Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 202]; 1991 September 29–October 2: Chicago. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1991Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Unal S, Mullen D, Flokowitsch JE, et al. Mechanism of in vitro vancomycin-ciprofloxacin synergy against Enterococcus faecium. Program and Abstracts of the 31st Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy [abstract 201]; 1991 September 29–October 2: Chicago. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1991Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Ramphal R, Boiger M, Oblan DJ, et al. Vancomycin is not an essential component of the initial empiric regimen of febrile neutropenic patients receiving ceftazidime: a randomized, prospective study. Antimicrob Agent Chemother 1992; 36: 1062–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis International Limited 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard V. SperaJr
    • 1
  • Bruce F. Farber
    • 2
  1. 1.Division of Infectious DiseasesBrooklyn Hospital CenterBrooklynUSA
  2. 2.Division of Infectious Diseases and ImmunologyNorth Shore University Hospital, Cornell University Medical CollegeManhassetUSA

Personalised recommendations