2010•Microbial Drug ResistanceOpen access

Evaluation of Eight Different Cephalosporins for Detection of Cephalosporin Resistance in Salmonella enterica and Escherichia coli

Frank M. Aarestrup, Henrik Hasman, Kees T. Veldman, Dik J. Mevius

Open full text 36 citations

Abstract

This study evaluates the efficacy of eight different cephalosporins for detection of cephalosporin resistance mediated by extended spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBL) and plasmidic AmpC beta-lactamases in Salmonella and Escherichia coli. A total of 138 E. coli and 86 Salmonella isolates with known beta-lactamase genes were tested for susceptibility toward cefoperazone, cefotaxime, cefpodoxime, cefquinome, ceftazidime, ceftiofur, ceftriaxone, and cefuroxime using minimum inhibitory concentration determinations and disc diffusion. The collection consisted of 84 ampicillin-susceptible, 57 ampicillin-resistant but cephalosporin-susceptible, 56 ESBL isolates and 19 isolates with plasmidic AmpC, as well as 10 ampC hyper-producing E. coli. The minimum inhibitory concentration distributions and zone inhibitions varied with the tested compound. Ampicillin-resistant isolates showed reduced susceptibility to the cephalosporins compared to ampicillin-susceptible isolates. Cefoperazone, cefquinome, and cefuroxime were not useful in detecting isolates with ESBL or plasmidic AmpC. The best substances for detection were cefotaxime, cefpodoxime, and ceftriaxone, whereas ceftazidime and ceftiofur were not as efficient. Ceftriaxone may be the recommended substance for monitoring because of some ability in separating ampC hyper-producing E. coli from ESBL and plasmidic AmpC isolates.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This study evaluates the efficacy of eight different cephalosporins for detection of cephalosporin resistance mediated by extended spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBL) and plasmidic AmpC beta-lactamases in Salmonella and Escherichia coli. A total of 138 E. coli and 86 Salmonella isolates with known beta-lactamase genes were tested for susceptibility toward cefoperazone, cefotaxime, cefpodoxime, cefquinome, ceftazidime, ceftiofur, ceftriaxone, and cefuroxime using minimum inhibitory concentration determinations and disc diffusion. The collection consisted of 84 ampicillin-susceptible, 57 ampicillin-resistant but cephalosporin-susceptible, 56 ESBL isolates and 19 isolates with plasmidic AmpC, as well as 10 ampC hyper-producing E. coli. The minimum inhibitory concentration distributions and zone inhibitions varied with the tested compound. Ampicillin-resistant isolates showed reduced susceptibility to the cephalosporins compared to ampicillin-susceptible isolates. Cefoperazone, cefquinome, and cefuroxime were not useful in detecting isolates with ESBL or plasmidic AmpC. The best substances for detection were cefotaxime, cefpodoxime, and ceftriaxone, whereas ceftazidime and ceftiofur were not as efficient. Ceftriaxone may be the recommended substance for monitoring because of some ability in separating ampC hyper-producing E. coli from ESBL and plasmidic AmpC isolates.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 36 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

This study evaluates the efficacy of eight different cephalosporins for detection of cephalosporin resistance mediated by extended spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBL) and plasmidic AmpC beta-lactamases in Salmonella and Escherichia coli. A total of 138 E. coli and 86 Salmonella isolates with known beta-lactamase genes were tested for susceptibility toward cefoperazone, cefotaxime, cefpodoxime, cefquinome, ceftazidime, ceftiofur, ceftriaxone, and cefuroxime using minimum inhibitory concentration determinations and disc diffusion. The collection consisted of 84 ampicillin-susceptible, 57 ampicillin-resistant but cephalosporin-susceptible, 56 ESBL isolates and 19 isolates with plasmidic AmpC, as well as 10 ampC hyper-producing E. coli. The minimum inhibitory concentration distributions and zone inhibitions varied with the tested compound. Ampicillin-resistant isolates showed reduced susceptibility to the cephalosporins compared to ampicillin-susceptible isolates. Cefoperazone, cefquinome, and cefuroxime were not useful in detecting isolates with ESBL or plasmidic AmpC. The best substances for detection were cefotaxime, cefpodoxime, and ceftriaxone, whereas ceftazidime and ceftiofur were not as efficient. Ceftriaxone may be the recommended substance for monitoring because of some ability in separating ampC hyper-producing E. coli from ESBL and plasmidic AmpC isolates.

Key concepts: Cefotaxime, Cefpodoxime, Cefoperazone, Cephalosporin, Microbiology, Ceftazidime, Ceftiofur, Ampicillin

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Evaluation of Eight Different Cephalosporins for Detection of Cephalosporin Resistance in Salmonella enterica and Escherichia coli — Research Paper | ScholarLens