, Volume 63, Issue 14, pp 1511–1524 | Cite as

Clinical Role of β-Lactam/β-Lactamase Inhibitor Combinations

Review Article


The use of β-lactamase inhibitors in combination with β-lactam antibiotics is currently the most successful strategy to combat a specific resistance mechanism. Their broad spectrum of activity originates from the ability of respective inhibitors to inactivate a wide range of β-lactamases produced by Gram-positive, Gram-negative, anaerobic and even acid-fast pathogens. Clinical experience confirms their effectiveness in the empirical treatment of respiratory, intra-abdominal, and skin and soft tissue infections. There is evidence to suggest that they are efficacious in treating patients with neutropenic fever and nosocomial infections, especially in combination with other agents. β-Lactam/β-lactamase inhibitor combinations are particularly useful against mixed infections. Their role in treating various multi-resistant pathogens such as Acinetobacter species and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia are gaining importance. Although, generally, they do not constitute reliable therapy against extended-spectrum β-lactamase producers, their substitution in place of cephalosporins appears to reduce emergence of the latter pathogens. Similarly, their use may also curtail the emergence of other resistant pathogens such as Clostridium difficile and vancomycin-resistant enterococci. β-Lactam/β-lactamase inhibitor combinations are generally well tolerated and their oral forms provide effective outpatient therapy against many commonly encountered infections. In certain scenarios, they could even be more cost-effective than conventional combination therapies. With the accumulation of so much clinical experience, their role in the management of infections is now becoming more clearly defined.


Community Acquire Pneumonia Minimum Inhibitory Concentration Cefoperazone ampC Sulbactam 
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.



No sources of funding were used to assist in the preparation of this manuscript. Professors Yuen and Kumana have received sponsorship from pharmaceutical companies to attend international conferences.


  1. 1.
    Virk A, Steckelberg JM. Clinical aspects of antimicrobial resistance. Mayo Clin Proc 2000; 75: 200–14PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bush K. New β-lactamases in gram-negative bacteria: diversity and impact on selection of antimicrobial therapy. Clin Infect Dis 2001; 32: 1085–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Prabhakaran K, Harris EB, Randhawa B. Bactericidal action of ampicillin/sulbactam against intracellular mycobacteria. Int J Antimicrob Agents 1999; 13(2): 133–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wright AJ. The penicillins. Mayo Clin Proc 1999; 74: 290–307PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Amyes SGB. Genes and spectrum. Clin Infect Dis 1998; 27 Suppl. 1: S21–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Aldridge KE, Ashcraft D, Cambre K, et al. Multicenter survey of the changing in vitro antimicrobial susceptibilities of clinical isolates of Bacteroides fragilis group, Prevotella, Fusobacterium, Porphyromonas, and Peptostreptococcus species. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2001; 45: 1238–43PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Williams JD. β-lactamase inhibition and in vitro activity of sulbactam and sulbactam/cefoperazone. Clin Infect Dis 1997; 24: 494–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program, 1997–1999. Clin Infect Dis 2001; 32 Suppl. 2: S81–113, S147-155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Backo M, Gaenger E, Burkart A, et al. Treatment of experimental staphylococcal endocarditis due to a strain with reduced susceptibility in vitro to vancomycin: efficacy of ampicillinsulbactam. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1999; 43: 2565–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schito GC, Georgopoulos A, Prieto J. Antibacterial activity of oral antibiotics against community-acquired respiratory pathogens from three European countries. J Antimicrob Chemother 2002; 50: 7–11PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Balko T, Karlowsky JA, PalatnickL P, et al. Characterization of inoculum effect with haemophilus influenzae and betalactams. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 1999; 33: 47–58PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sirot D. Extended-spectrum plasmid-mediated β-lactamases. J Antimicrob Chemother 1995; 36 Suppl. A: 19–34PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nagano R, Adachi Y, Imamura H, et al. Carbapenem derivatives as potential inhibitors of various β-lactamases, including class B metallo-β-lactamases. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1999; 43: 2497–503PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lister PD, Gardner VM, Sanders CC. Clavulanate induces expression of Pseudomonas aeruginosa AmpC cephalosporinase at physiologically relevant concentrations and antagonizes the antibacterial activity of ticarcillin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1999 Apr; 43(4): 882–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    De la Pena A, Derendorf H. Pharmacokinetic properties of β-lactamase inhibitors. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther 1999; 37: 63–75PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    William AC. Does the dose matter?Clin Infect Dis 2001; 33: S233–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Munoz P, Garcia-Garrote F, Bouza E. Broad-spectrum β-lactam antibiotics with β-lactamase inhibitors. Int J Antimicrob Agents 1996; 7: S9–S14PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Saito A, Shimada J, Ohmori M, et al. Phase I study of sulbactam. Chemotherapy 1984; 32 Suppl. 4: 192–201Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kumada T. Phase I study of sulbactam/cefoperazone (6-times administration trial). Chemotherapy 1984; 32 Suppl. 4: 214–21Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Parfitt K, Sweetman SC, Blake PS, et al. Martindale: the complete drug reference. 32th ed. London: Pharmaceutical Press, 1999Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Thomas C, Steven CB, Sabine R, et al. Comparison of ampicillin-sulbactam and ticarcillin-clavulanic acid in patients with chronic renal failure: effects of differential pharmacokinetics on serum bactericidal activity. Pharmacotherapy 1994; 14: 147–52Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nakagawa K, Momono S, Sasaki YU, et al. Preoperative administration of a sulbactam/cefoperazone mixture during cholecystectomy. Surgical Care 1990; 32(6): 875–9Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Todd PA, Benfield P. Amoxicillin/clavulanic acid: an update. Drugs 1990; 39: 264–307PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pitts NE, Gilbert GS, Knirsch AK, et al. Worldwide clinical experience with sultamicillin. APMIS Suppl 1989; 5: 23–4PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Seto WH, Chiang TY, Kou M, et al. Hospital antibiotic prescribing successfully modified by immediate concurrent feedback. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1996; 41: 229–34PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Settle CD, Wilcox MH, Fawley WN, et al. Prospective study of the risk of Clostridium difficile diarrhoea in elderly patients following treatment with cefotaxime or piperacillin-tazobactam. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 1998; 12: 1217–23PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Larrey D, Vial T, Micaleff A, et al. Hepatitis associated with amoxycillin-clavulanic acid combination: report of 15 cases. Gut 1992; 33: 368–71PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hedberg M, Lindqvist L, Tuner K, et al. Effect of betalactamase inhibitors on beta-lactamases from anaerobic bacteria. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1992; 11: 1100–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Eugene BB. Current guidelines for the treatment and prevention of nosocomial infections. Drugs 1999; 58: 51–67Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mandell LA, Marrie TJ, Grossman RF, et al. Canadian guidelines for the initial management of community-acquired pneumonia: an evidence-based update by the Canadian infectious diseases society and the Canadian thoracic society. Clin Infect Dis 2000; 31: 383–421PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Brun-Buisson C, Sollet JP, Schweich H. Treatment of ventilator-associated pneumonia with piperacillin-tazobactam/amikacin versus ceftazidime/amikacin: a multicenter, randomized controlled trial. Clin Infect Dis 1998; 26: 346–54PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Jaccard C, Troillet N, Harbarth S, et al. Prospective randomized comparison of imipenem-cilastatin and piperacillin-tazobactam in nosocomial pneumonia or peritonitis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1998 Nov; 42(11): 2966–72PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Brismar B, Malmborg AS, Tunevall G, et al. Piperacillin-tazobactam versus imipenem-cilastatin for treatment of intraabdominal infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1992; 36: 2766–72PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Akyurek N, Bedirli A, Kucuk KC, et al. Randomised comparison of cefoperazone-sulbactam and imipenem-cilastatin in the treatment of intra-abdominal infections [abstract]. Br J Surg 1997; 84: 880Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Cometta A, Zinner S, de Bock R, et al. Piperacillin-tazobactam plus amikacin versus ceftazidime plus amikacin as empiric therapy for fever granulocytopenic patients with cancer. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1995; 39: 445–52PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Sanz MA, Lopez J, Lahuerta JJ, et al. Cefepime plus amikacin versus piperacillin-tazobactam plus amikacin for initial antibiotic therapy in haematology patients with febrile neutropenia: results of an open, randomized, multicentre trial. J Antimicrob Chemother 2002; 50: 79–88PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Winston DJ, Bartoni K, Bruckerner DA, et al. Randomized comparison of sulbactam/cefoperazone with imipenem as empirical monotherapy for febrile granulocytopenic patients. Clin Infect Dis 1998; 26: 576–83PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Finberg RW, Talcott JA. Fever and neutropenia: how to use a new treatment strategy. N Engl J Med 1999; 341: 362–3PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    McKinnon PS, Paladino JA, Grayson ML, et al. Cost-effectiveness of ampicillin/sulbactam versus imipenem/cilastatin in the treatment of limb-threatening foot infections in diabetic patients. Clin Infect Dis 1997; 24: 57–63PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Talan DA, Summanen PH, Finegold SM. Ampicillin/sulbactam and cefoxitin in the treatment of cutaneous and other soft tissue abscesses in patients with or without histories of injection drug abuse. Clin Infect Dis 2000; 31: 464–71PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Alan LB, Michael AG, Jack MG, et al. Diagnosis and management of group A streptococcal pharyngitis: a practice guideline. Clin Infect Dis 1997; 25: 574–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kuriyama T, Karasawa T, Nakagawa K, et al. Incidence of betalactamase production and antimicrobial susceptibility of anaerobic gram-negative rods isolated from pus specimens of orofacial odontogenic infections. Oral Microbiol Immunol 2001; 16: 10–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Mandell GL, Bennett JE, Dolin R. Principle and practice of infectious diseases. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Churchill Livingstone, 2000: 689–699, 2641-2642Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Goldstein FW. Penicillin-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae: selection by both β-lactam and non-β-lactam antibiotics. J Antimicrob Chemother 1999; 44: 141–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Douglas S, Peter D. Association between antibiotic resistance and community prescribing: a critical review of bias and confounding in published studies. Clin Infect Dis 2001; 33: S193–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    John GB, Scott FD, Lionel AM, etal. Practice guidelines for the management of community-acquired pneumonia in adults. Clin Infect Dis 2000; 31: 347–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Craig WA. The future: can we learn from the past? Diagn Microbial Infect Dis 1997; 27: 49–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Thorburn CE, Knott SJ, Edwards DI. Iitn vititro activities of oral beta-lactams at concentrations achieved in humans against penicillin-susceptible and -resistant pneumoncocci and potential to select resistance. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1998; 42: 1973–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Auckenthaler R. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of oral beta-lactam antibiotics as a two-dimensional approach to their efficacy. J Antimicrob Chemother 2002; 50: 13–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Gleason PP, Meehan TP, Fine JM, et al. Associations between initial antimicrobial therapy and medical outcomes for hospitalized elderly patients with pneumonia. Arch Intern Med 1999; 159: 2562–72PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Ho PL, Tse WS, Tsang KWT, et al. Risk factors for acquisition of levofloxacin-resistant streptococcus pneumoniae: a casecontrol study. Clin Infect Dis 2001; 32: 701–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Quenzer RW, Pettit KG, Arnold RJ, et al. Pharmacoeconomic analysis of selected antibiotics in lower respiratory tract infection. Am J Manag Care 1997; 3: 1027–36PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Dilip N, Ethan R, Gavin B, et al. Do guidelines for communityacquired pneumonia improve the cost-effectiveness of hospital care? Clin Infect Dis 2001; 32: 728–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Chanal C, Bonnet R, De Champs C, et al. Prevalence of betalactamases among 1072 clinical stains of Proteus mirabilis: a 2 year survey in a French hospital. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2000; 44: 1930–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Kaye KS, Harris AD, Gold H, et al. Risk factors for recovery of ampicillin-sulbactam resistant Escherichia coli in hospitalised patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2000; 44: 1004–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Lautenbach E, Patel JB, Bilker WB, et al. Extended-spectrum β-lactamase producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumonia: risk factors for infection and impact of resistance on outcomes. Clin Infect Dis 2001; 32: 1162–71PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Davey PG, Vacani P, Parker SE, et al. Assessing cost effectiveness of antimicrobial treatment: monotherapy compared with combination therapy. Eur J Surg Suppl 1994; 573: 67–72PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Claude M, Agnes C, Annick G, et al. Comparison of concentrations of sulbactam-ampicillin administered by bolus injections or bolus plus continous infusion in tissues of patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1998; 42: 1093–7Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Carmen B, Ana S, Maria G, et al. Iitn vititro susceptibility of species of the Bacteroides fragilis group to newer β-lactam agents. J Antimicrob Chemother 1999; 43: 133–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Ninin E, Moreau P, Andre-Richet B, et al. Longitudinal study of bacterial, viral, and fungal infections in adult recipients of bone marrow transplants. Clin Infect Dis 2001; 33: 41–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Hughes WT, Armstrong D, Bodey GP, et al. 2002 guidelines for the use of antimicrobial agents in neutropenic patients with cancer. Clin Infect Dis 2002; 34: 730–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Davidson RN, Wall RA. Prevention and management of infections in patients without a spleen. Clin Microbiol Infect 2001; 7: 657–60PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Talan DA, Citron DM, Abrahamian FM, et al. Bacteriological analysis of infected dog and cat bites. N Engl J Med 1999; 340: 85–92PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Nichols RL, Florman S. Clinical presentations of soft tissue infections and surgical site infections. Clin Infect Dis 2001; 33 Suppl. 2: S84–93PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Asensio A, Guerrero A, Quereda C, et al. Colonization and infection of methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus: associated factors and eradication. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1996; 17: 20–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Pefanis A, Thauvin-Eliopoulos C, Eliopoulos GM, et al. Activity of ampicillin-sulbactam and oxacillin in experimental endocarditis caused by beta-lactamase-hyperproducing Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1993; 37: 507–11PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Hiramatsu K, Hanaka H, Ino T, et al. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus clinical strain with reduced vancomycin susceptibility. J Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1997; 40: 135–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Lister PD. Beta-lactamase inhibitor combinations with extended-spectrum penicillins: factors influencing antibacterial activity against enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Pharmacotherapy 2000; 20: 213S-8SCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Corbella X, Ariza J, Ardanuy C, et al. Efficacy of sulbactam alone and in combination with ampicillin in nosocomial infections caused by multiresistant Acinetobacter baumannii. J Antimicrob Chemother 1998; 42: 793–802PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Leelarasamee A. Burkholderia pseudomallei: the unbeatable foe? Southeast Asian J Trop Med Public Health 1998; 29: 410–5PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Chetchotisakd P, Porramatikul S, Mootsikapun P, et al. Randomized, double-blind, controlled study of Cefoperazone-sulbactam plus cotrimoxazole versus ceftazidime plus cotrimoxazole for the treatment of severe melioidosis. Clin Infect Dis 2001; 33: 29–34PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Livermore DM, Brown DFJ. Detection of β-lactamase-mediated resistance. J Antimicrob Chemother 2001; 48 Suppl. 1: 59–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Essack SY. Treatment options for extended-spectrum betalactamase-producers. FEMS Microbiol Lett 2000; 190: 181–4PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Paterson DL. Recommendation for treatment of severe infections caused by Enterobacteriaceae producing extended-spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBLs). Clin Microbiol Infect 2000; 6: 460–3PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Rice LB, Eckstein EC, Vente JD, et al. Ceftazidime-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates recovered at the Cleveland department of Veterans affairs medical center. Clin Infect Dis 1996; 23: 118–24PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Pena C, Pujol M, Ardanuy C, et al. Epidemiology and successful control of a large outbreak due to Klebsiella pneumoniae producing extended-spectrum β-lactamases. J Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1998; 42: 53–8Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Drusano GL. Infection in the intensive care unit: β-lactamasemediated resistance among Enterobacteriaceae and optimal antimicrobial dosing. Clin Infect Dis 1998; 27 Suppl. 1: S111–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Calil R, Marba ST, von Nowakonski A, et al. Reduction in colonization and nosocomial infection by multiresistant bacteria in a neonatal unit after institution of educational measures and restriction in the use of cephalosporins. Am J Infect Control 2001; 29: 133–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Higashitani F, Nishida K, Hyodo A, et al. Effects of tazobactam on the frequency of the emergence of resistant strains from Enterobacter cloacae, Citrobacter freundii, and Proteus vulgaris (beta-lactamase derepressed mutants). J Antibiot (Tokyo) 1995; 48: 1027–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Kadima TA, Weiner JH. Mechanism of suppression of piperacillin resistance in enterobacteria by tazobactam. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1997; 41: 2177–83PubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Pfaller MA, Jones RN, Marshall SA, et al. Inducible amp C beta-lactamase producing gram-negative bacilli from blood stream infections: frequency, antimicrobial susceptibility, and molecular epidemiology in a national surveillance program (SCOPE). Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 1997; 28: 211–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Bradley SJ, Wilson ALT, Allen MC, et al. The control of hyperendemic glycopeptide-resistant Enterococcous spp. on a haematology unit by changing antibiotic usage. J Antimicrob Chemother 1999; 43: 261–6Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Quale J, Landman D, Saurina G, et al. Manipulation of a hospital antimicrobial formulary to control an outbreak of vancomycin-resistant enterococci. Clin Infect Dis 1996; 23: 1020–125PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Sullivan A, Edlund C, Nord CE. Effect of antimicrobial agents on the ecology balance of human microflora. Lancet Infect Dis 2001; I: 101–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Gould IM. A review of the role of antibiotic policies in the control of antibiotic resistance. J Antimicrob Chemother 1999; 43: 459–65PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Chaibi EB, Sirot D, Paul G, et al. Inhibitor-resistant TEM β-lactamases: phenotypic, genetic and biochemical characteristics. J Antimicrob Chemother 1999; 43: 447–58PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Leflon-Guibout V, Speldooren V, Heym B, et al. Epidemiology survey of amoxicillin-clavulanate resistance and corresponding molecular mechanisms in Escherichia coli isolates in France: new genetic features of bla (TEM) genes. J Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2000; 44: 2709–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Department of Medicine, Queen Mary HospitalUniversity of Hong KongHong Kong
  2. 2.Department of Microbiology, Queen Mary HospitalUniversity of Hong KongHong Kong

Personalised recommendations