1990PubMedRequires access

In vitro activity against clinically important gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria of sulbactam, alone and in combination with ampicillin, cefotaxime, mezlocillin, and piperacillin.

A F Schmalreck, A Wildfeuer

Open publisher page 6 citations

Abstract

The in vitro effects of the single agents, and the synergistic/antagonistic action of three different combinations of ampicillin (AMP, CAS 69-53-4), cefotaxime (CTX, CAS 63527-52-6), mezlocillin (MEZ, CAS 51481-65-3), and piperacillin (PIP, CAS 61477-96-1) with the beta-lactamase inhibitor sulbactam (SUL, CAS 68373-14-8) were determined against 675 gram-positive and gram-negative, both aerobic and anaerobic bacteria. All the combinations of sulbactam and the antibiotics (1: 1, 1:2 and 1:4) exhibited very similar synergistic action. The percentage of the total strains tested for which synergistic activity was found was 51% with SUL + AMP (1:1), 24% with SUL + CTX (1:1), 31% with SUL + MEZ (1:1), and 28% with SUL + PIP (1:1). A fourfold or greater reduction of MIC's in the comparison with the antibiotics alone was found with 23% of the total strains tested for the SUL + AMP, with 9% of the strains tested with SUL + CTX, with 11% of the strains tested with SUL + MEZ, and with 15% of the strains tested with the SUL + PIP-combination. In the presence of sulbactam, 18% of the strains tested showed a significant reduction in the number of resistant strains with ampicillin, 7% with cefotaxime, 16% with mezlocillin, 14% with piperacillin, and in parallel there was an increase in the number of fully susceptible strains (shift from resistant or moderately sensitive to sensitive) by about 14%. In comparison with the antibiotic alone, the most marked reductions in the number of resistant strains on combination with sulbactam were as follows (the percentage of reduction is shown in brackets): for SUL + AMP and Acine-tobacter spp. (39% fewer resistant strains). Citrobacter spp. (-60%), Enterobacter aerogenes (-48%), Klebsiella oxytoca (-49%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (-63%), Morganella morganii (-74%), and Proteus vulgaris (-55%); for SUL + CTX and Acinetobacter spp. (-38%), Enterobacter cloacae (-6%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (-16%), Serratia marcescens (-9%), and Bacteroides fragilis (-31%); for SUL + MEZ and Acinetobacter spp. (-68%), Citrobacter spp. (-27%), Enterobacter spp. (-23%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (-32%), and Serratia marcescens (-19%); for SUL + PIP and Acinetobacter spp. (-41%), Citrobacter spp. (-30%), Klebsiella spp. (-30%), and Serratia marcescens (-33%).

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The in vitro effects of the single agents, and the synergistic/antagonistic action of three different combinations of ampicillin (AMP, CAS 69-53-4), cefotaxime (CTX, CAS 63527-52-6), mezlocillin (MEZ, CAS 51481-65-3), and piperacillin (PIP, CAS 61477-96-1) with the beta-lactamase inhibitor sulbactam (SUL, CAS 68373-14-8) were determined against 675 gram-positive and gram-negative, both aerobic and anaerobic bacteria. All the combinations of sulbactam and the antibiotics (1: 1, 1:2 and 1:4) exhibited very similar synergistic action. The percentage of the total strains tested for which synergistic activity was found was 51% with SUL + AMP (1:1), 24% with SUL + CTX (1:1), 31% with SUL + MEZ (1:1), and 28% with SUL + PIP (1:1). A fourfold or greater reduction of MIC's in the comparison with the antibiotics alone was found with 23% of the total strains tested for the SUL + AMP, with 9% of the strains tested with SUL + CTX, with 11% of the strains tested with SUL + MEZ, and with 15% of the strains tested with the SUL + PIP-combination. In the presence of sulbactam, 18% of the strains tested showed a significant reduction in the number of resistant strains with ampicillin, 7% with cefotaxime, 16% with mezlocillin, 14% with piperacillin, and in parallel there was an increase in the number of fully susceptible strains (shift from resistant or moderately sensitive to sensitive) by about 14%. In comparison with the antibiotic alone, the most marked reductions in the number of resistant strains on combination with sulbactam were as follows (the percentage of reduction is shown in brackets): for SUL + AMP and Acine-tobacter spp. (39% fewer resistant strains). Citrobacter spp. (-60%), Enterobacter aerogenes (-48%), Klebsiella oxytoca (-49%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (-63%), Morganella morganii (-74%), and Proteus vulgaris (-55%); for SUL + CTX and Acinetobacter spp. (-38%), Enterobacter cloacae (-6%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (-16%), Serratia marcescens (-9%), and Bacteroides fragilis (-31%); for SUL + MEZ and Acinetobacter spp. (-68%), Citrobacter spp. (-27%), Enterobacter spp. (-23%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (-32%), and Serratia marcescens (-19%); for SUL + PIP and Acinetobacter spp. (-41%), Citrobacter spp. (-30%), Klebsiella spp. (-30%), and Serratia marcescens (-33%).

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 6 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The in vitro effects of the single agents, and the synergistic/antagonistic action of three different combinations of ampicillin (AMP, CAS 69-53-4), cefotaxime (CTX, CAS 63527-52-6), mezlocillin (MEZ, CAS 51481-65-3), and piperacillin (PIP, CAS 61477-96-1) with the beta-lactamase inhibitor sulbactam (SUL, CAS 68373-14-8) were determined against 675 gram-positive and gram-negative, both aerobic and anaerobic bacteria. All the combinations of sulbactam and the antibiotics (1: 1, 1:2 and 1:4) exhibited very similar synergistic action. The percentage of the total strains tested for which synergistic activity was found was 51% with SUL + AMP (1:1), 24% with SUL + CTX (1:1), 31% with SUL + MEZ (1:1), and 28% with SUL + PIP (1:1). A fourfold or greater reduction of MIC's in the comparison with the antibiotics alone was found with 23% of the total strains tested for the SUL + AMP, with 9% of the strains tested with SUL + CTX, with 11% of the strains tested with SUL + MEZ, and with 15% of the strains tested with the SUL + PIP-combination. In the presence of sulbactam, 18% of the strains tested showed a significant reduction in the number of resistant strains with ampicillin, 7% with cefotaxime, 16% with mezlocillin, 14% with piperacillin, and in parallel there was an increase in the number of fully susceptible strains (shift from resistant or moderately sensitive to sensitive) by about 14%. In comparison with the antibiotic alone, the most marked reductions in the number of resistant strains on combination with sulbactam were as follows (the percentage of reduction is shown in brackets): for SUL + AMP and Acine-tobacter spp. (39% fewer resistant strains). Citrobacter spp. (-60%), Enterobacter aerogenes (-48%), Klebsiella oxytoca (-49%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (-63%), Morganella morganii (-74%), and Proteus vulgaris (-55%); for SUL + CTX and Acinetobacter spp. (-38%), Enterobacter cloacae (-6%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (-16%), Serratia marcescens (-9%), and Bacteroides fragilis (-31%); for SUL + MEZ and Acinetobacter spp. (-68%), Citrobacter spp. (-27%), Enterobacter spp. (-23%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (-32%), and Serratia marcescens (-19%); for SUL + PIP and Acinetobacter spp. (-41%), Citrobacter spp. (-30%), Klebsiella spp. (-30%), and Serratia marcescens (-33%).

Key concepts: Mezlocillin, Sulbactam, Cefotaxime, Piperacillin, Ampicillin, Microbiology, Antibiotics, Cefoperazone

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
In vitro activity against clinically important gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria of sulbactam, alone and in combination with ampicillin, cefotaxime, mezlocillin, and piperacillin. — Research Paper | ScholarLens