Susceptibility trends of Bacteroides fragilis group isolates from Buenos Aires, Argentina.

The aim of this study was to analyze the susceptibility trends to seven antibiotics of Bacteroides fragilis group isolates based on three survey studies performed by the Committee of Anaerobic Bacteria between 1989 and 2002. Fifty three, 82 and 65 B. fragilis group isolates were collected during each period. The antimicrobial agents included were: ampicillin, ampicillin-sulbactam (2:1), cefoxitin, piperacillin, imipenem, clindamycin, and metronidazole. Minimal inhibitory concentrations (MICs) were determined according to the reference agar dilution method described by the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI, formerly NCCLS). The most active antibiotics for B. fragilis and non-B. fragilis species throughout the three periods were: imipenem with 99.1 and 100% of activity, respectively, and metronidazole with 100% of activity. The susceptibility to ampicillin-sulbactam showed a decrease, from 100% to 90.3% and to 82.4 % in the last period, for both B. fragilis and non-B. fragilis species, respectively. The overall susceptibility rates for cefoxitin, piperacillin, and clindamycin were significantly different between B. fragilis and non-B. fragilis species (84.2% vs. 56.5%; 85.9% vs. 66.7% and 88.8% vs. 64.7%, respectively, p < 0.05). Cefoxitin was the antibiotic that showed more variations as regards periods and species. The susceptibility rates for clindamycin were low, about 60%, for non-B. fragilis species during the last two periods. The variations observed in the susceptibility patterns of the B. fragilis group isolates emphasize the need to continue monitoring the emergence of resistance in order to guide the election of the most appropriate antibiotic therapy scheme for anaerobic infections.

[1]  D. Hecht Anaerobes: antibiotic resistance, clinical significance, and the role of susceptibility testing. , 2006, Anaerobe.

[2]  E. Culebras,et al.  In vitro activity of tigecycline against Bacteroides species. , 2005, The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy.

[3]  Mirta Litterio,et al.  Actividad “in vitro” de 10 antimicrobianos frente a bacterias anaerobias: Estudio multicéntrico, 1999-2002 , 2004 .

[4]  P. Hsueh,et al.  High Incidence of Cefoxitin and Clindamycin Resistance among Anaerobes in Taiwan , 2002, Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

[5]  D. Snydman,et al.  National survey on the susceptibility of Bacteroides Fragilis Group: report and analysis of trends for 1997-2000. , 2002, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[6]  D. Snydman,et al.  Antimicrobial resistance and clinical outcome of Bacteroides bacteremia: findings of a multicenter prospective observational trial. , 2000, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[7]  H. Bianchini Methods for Susceptibility Testing in Anaerobes: When and How they Should be Used , 1999 .

[8]  V. Rotimi,et al.  Bacteroides species highly resistant to metronidazole: an emerging clinical problem? , 1999, Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases.

[9]  E. Eerola,et al.  Clinical significance and outcome of anaerobic bacteremia. , 1998, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[10]  I. Podglajen,et al.  Genotypic identification of two groups within the species Bacteroides fragilis by ribotyping and by analysis of PCR-generated fragment patterns and insertion sequence content , 1995, Journal of bacteriology.

[11]  M. Malamy,et al.  Beta-lactamase-mediated imipenem resistance in Bacteroides fragilis , 1986, Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

[12]  E. Bruck,et al.  National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. , 1980, Pediatrics.