Cefotaxime therapy of serious infections with multiresistant gram-negative bacilli

Evaluation of ciprofloxacin's activity against recent clinical isolates

The in vitro antibacterial activity of ciprofloxacin, a new quinoline carboxylic acid, was tested against 1671 recently clinically isolated bacterial strains, by measuring the minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC). Comparisons were made with other quinolones: nalidixic acid, norfloxacin, and other drugs: piperacillin, cefoxitin, cefotetan, ceftazidime, tobramycin, rifampin, tetracycline, chloramphenicol. Ciprofloxacin was very active against the tested species and was the most active drug against all the bacterial strains, with a geometric mean, a MIC50 and MIC90 of 0.27, 0.12 and 2 micrograms/ml, respectively.

Stability of ampicillin, piperacillin, cefotaxime, netilmicin and amikacin in an L-amino acid solution prepared for total parenteral nutrition of newborn infants

The stability of ampicillin, piperacillin and cefotaxime, alone or in combination with either netilmicin or amikacin, was tested by microbiological methods at 29 degrees C (ampicillin, also at 22 degrees C) in an L-amino acid solution specially prepared for newborn infants. In the case of ampicillin, the mean concentration had dropped to 84% of the initial value after 24 hours. This fall is acceptable. Piperacillin and cefotaxime were stable. Admixture of netilmicin or amikacin did not affect the activity of ampicillin, piperacillin and cefotaxime. The concentrations of netilmicin and amikacin were stable for 24 hours. Combination with ampicillin, piperacillin or cefotaxime did not affect the activity of either aminoglycoside. The antibiotics investigated could therefore be used in our TPN infusion system.

Use of cephalosporins in the immunologically compromised patient

Infection is a major threat to patients with neutropenia, particularly those with haematological malignancies who are undergoing chemotherapy. Early use of an empirical antibiotic regimen with the broadest possible spectrum of activity is recommended until culture data can guide the choice. A standard combination in many centres is an amino-glycoside and a semisynthetic penicillin with antipseudomonal activity or a cephalosporin. However, no regimen can adequately cover all potential pathogens and in these patients, who are exposed to many toxic insults, the choice of antibiotics may significantly increase the incidence of side effects, particularly nephrotoxicity. There has, therefore, been considerable interest in simpler, less toxic (and less expensive) regimens and the concept of monotherapy has been explored. Although recent studies using ceftazidime alone have supported this as an effective approach, there remain several issues to resolve; and on a more cautionary note preliminary results from the latest EORTC study, which recruited more than 1200 patients, suggest that in Gram-negative bacteraemia, conventional combination therapy remains the treatment of choice in neutropenia. While monotherapy is attractive in an environment of low drug resistance when exposure to third generation cephalosporins is infrequent, this is rarely the case. In addition, the widespread use of tunnelled catheters for venous access had led to an increase in Gram-positive infections, and the more intensive immunosuppression to the emergence of fungal infections. Although these tend not to be rapidly fatal, their presence must be considered in designing treatment strategies. The influence of the host and treatment on the type of infection and the relative merits of the differing concepts in therapy are explored in detail in this article.

Population analysis of susceptibility to cefotaxime and desacetyl-cefotaxime in Staphylococcus and Enterobacteriaceae

Population analyses of susceptibility to cefotaxime (CTX) and desacetyl-cefotaxime (DCTX) of strains of Staphylococcus and some genera of Enterobacteriaceae were carried out. DCTX, which is the main metabolite of CTX, has antimicrobial activity. The penicillinase-producing strains of S. aureus and S. epidermidis were homogeneous as regards susceptibility to both agents. CTX was about 4-8 times more active than DCTX. The methicillin-resistant strains contained a sub-population of resistant bacteria with both CTX and DCTX. The frequency of resistant bacteria was 10(-6) - 10(-5). The E. coli strain was homogeneous to both agents. The strains of Enterobacter cloacae and Citrobacter freundii had a sub-population of resistant bacteria with both agents. The frequency of resistant bacteria was 10(-7) - 10(-4.5). In Klebsiella pneumoniae no resistant sub-population was found. CTX was about four times more active than DCTX with the strains of the Enterobacteriaceae. DCTX had no advantage over CTX as regards homogeneity of susceptibility of the populations examined. CTX seems applicable for treatment of infections with E. coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and penicillinase-producing, methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus, but should not be used alone in treatments of infections with Enterobacter cloacae or Citrobacter freundii.

A review of the use of cefotaxime in the treatment of skin and skin structure infections, with special reference to gram-positive pathogens

Data compiled from computer-generated summaries of patient records submitted to Hoechst-Roussel Pharmaceuticals were reviewed regarding the efficacy and toxicity of cefotaxime in the therapy of skin and skin structure infections associated with gram-positive pathogens. In addition, published open and comparative trials employing cefotaxime in gram-positive and gram-negative skin infections were evaluated with respect to the pathogens isolated and the nature, severity and bacteriological and clinical outcome of the treated infections. Within the limitations of the data reviewed, cefotaxime appeared to be a safe and effective therapy in greater than 90% of infections including cellulitis, abscesses and necrotizing ulcers of the skin and subcutaneous tissues when associated with the isolation of susceptible gram-negative bacilli, methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus, or aerobic or anaerobic gram-positive pathogens susceptible to aqueous penicillin G. The data would indicate that cefotaxime is a suitable therapy for patients with presumed polymicrobial, non-crepitant infections of the skin or skin structures pending microbiological studies. However, cefotaxime cannot be recommended for similar infections due to organisms such as methicillin-resistant S. aureus or Pseudomonas aeruginosa that are commonly resistant to cefotaxime in vitro. Data regarding skin and skin structure infections associated with Clostridium spp. and enterococcal group D streptococci are either lacking or inconclusive with respect to the utility of cefotaxime.

Use of ceftazidime in the therapy of serious infections, including those due to multiresistant organisms

Ceftazidime was administered intravenously or intramuscularly or both in doses of 1 to 6 g per day to 33 patients with serious gram-negative bacillary infections (12 pulmonary, 10 urinary tract, 4 soft tissue, 4 intraabdominal, and 3 miscellaneous infections). Twenty-one patients were septicemic. We identified 20 isolates of members of the family Enterobacteriaceae and 13 isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Seventeen patients had failed to respond to previous antimicrobial therapy. A total of 23 patients were clinically cured, 7 patients improved, and 3 patients failed to respond to therapy. The selection or emergence of resistant organisms during treatment (mostly Candida spp., Staphylococcus aureus, and enterococci) was noted in 11 patients. Toxicity was minimal (reversible mild liver function abnormalities and eosinophilia). The results of this study suggest that ceftazidime is an effective and well-tolerated new cephalosporin for the therapy of serious infections due to susceptible gram-negative organisms.

Cefotaxime. A review of its antibacterial activity, pharmacological properties and therapeutic use

SYNOPSIS

Cefotaxime is a new 'third generation' semisynthetic cephalosporin administered intravenously or intramuscularly. It has a broad spectrum of activity against Gram-positive and Gram-negative aerobic and anaerobic bacteria, and is generally more active against Gram-negative bacteria than the 'first' and 'second generation' cephalosporins. Although cefotaxime has some activity against Pseudomonas aeruginosa, on the basis of present evidence it cannot be recommended as sole antibiotic therapy for pseudomonal infections. However, cefotaxime has been effective in treating infections due to other 'difficult' organisms, such as multidrug-resistant Enterobacteriaceae. Like other cephalosporins, cefotaxime is effective in treating patients with complicated urinary tract and lower respiratory tract infections, particularly pneumonia caused by Gram-negative bacilli. High response rates have also been achieved in patients with Gram-negative bacteraemia. Although favourable clinical results have been obtained in patients with infections caused by mixed aerobic/anaerobic organisms (such as peritonitis or soft tissue infections), the relatively low in vitro activity of cefotaxime against Bacteroides fragilis may restrict its usage in situations where this organism is the suspected or proven pathogen. In preliminary studies, males and females treated with a single intramuscular dose of cefotaxime for uncomplicated gonorrhoea caused by penicillinase-producing strains of Neisseria gonorrhoeae responded very favourably. Encouraging results have also been reported in open studies in children including neonates, treated with cefotaxime for meningitis and various other serious infections. In some situations, cefotaxime has been given in combination with another antibiotic such as an aminoglycoside, but the merits of such a combination have not been clearly established. Whether cefotaxime alone is appropriate therapy for conditions previously treated with aminoglycosides (other than pseudomonal infections) also needs additional clarification, but if established as equally effective in such conditions cefotaxime offers potentially important clinical and practical advantages in its apparent lack of serious adverse effects and freedom from the need to undertake drug plasma concentration monitoring.