China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Sulfonamides
Published in M. Lindsay Grayson, Sara E. Cosgrove, Suzanne M. Crowe, M. Lindsay Grayson, William Hope, James S. McCarthy, John Mills, Johan W. Mouton, David L. Paterson, Kucers’ The Use of Antibiotics, 2017
Natasha E. Holmes, M. Lindsay Grayson
Enterobacteriaceae, such as Escherichia coli, Enterobacter, Klebsiella, Proteus, Yersinia, Salmonella, and Shigella spp., are sulfonamide susceptible although resistance is increasing. However, Providencia spp. are often resistant (Hawkey, 1984). The pathogenic Neisseriae (gonococci and meningococci) were initially susceptible; however, sulfadiazine-resistant strains of N. meningitidis emerged in the USA in the 1960s in the context of mass treatment of military recruit camp outbreaks (Brundage et al., 2002). Haemophilus influenzae type b, including ampicillin-resistant strains, is susceptible; this organism can be inhibited by concentrations achievable in saliva (Bannatyne and Cheung, 1978). Often H. ducreyi is susceptible to sulfonamides, but the rates of susceptibility vary according to geographical location (Kraus et al., 1982; Dangor et al., 1990).
Antibacterial activity of essential oils for combating colistin-resistant bacteria
Published in Expert Review of Anti-infective Therapy, 2022
Abdullah M. Foda, Mohamed H. Kalaba, Gamal M. El-Sherbiny, Saad A. Moghannem, Esmail M. El-Fakharany
The results obtained from the antibiotics susceptibility test of the five bacterial isolates referred to as these isolates are considered to be multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria, except E. coli AB-7. According to (CLSI) [28], the bacterial strain resistant to one antibiotic of three or more antibiotic classes is considered to be multidrug-resistant (MDR). Many studies have stated that there are various genera of Gram-negative bacteria that have acquired or natural resistance to colistin, such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Acinetobacter baumannii, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Escherichia coli, Proteus spp., Morganella morganii, Serratia spp., Providencia spp., Edwardsiella tarda, and Burkholderia cepacia. Most of the above-mentioned resistant bacteria have several mechanisms to defend themselves against polymyxins, such as the alteration of lipopolysaccharide (LPS) of the cell envelope, modifications of lipid A with phosphoethanolamine and 4-amino-4-deoxy-L-arabinose, furthermore, the use of efflux pumps, the development of capsules and overexpression of the outer membrane protein OprH, which are all efficiently controlled at the molecular level. All these strategies are thought to be responsible for the acquired and intrinsic resistance of polymyxins in these bacteria [30–33]. Gram-negative bacteria are resistant to colistin through intrinsic, adaptation, or mutation, in addition to horizontally acquired resistance via the mcr-1 gene and its variants [7].
Recent molecules in the treatment of severe infections caused by ESBL-producing bacteria
Published in Expert Review of Anti-infective Therapy, 2021
Alessandro Russo, Marco Berruti, Daniele Roberto Giacobbe, Antonio Vena, Matteo Bassetti
Omadacycline is a novel aminomethylcycline antimicrobial, a semisynthetic tetracycline available in both oral and intravenous formulations. Omadacycline has a clinical spectrum similar to other tetracyclines and in particular shows activity against methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus spp., Enterobacterales, anaerobes, and atypical pathogens causing CAP. Among ESBL and non-ESBL-producing Gram-negative bacteria, it shows for Escherichia coli an MIC90 of 2 µg/ml, and for Klebsiella pneumoniae an MIC90 of 8 µg/mL. No activity is reported against Proteus spp., Providencia spp., and P. aeruginosa like other tetracyclines [54].
Multi-targeted properties of the probiotic saccharomyces cerevisiae CNCM I-3856 against enterotoxigenic escherichia coli (ETEC) H10407 pathogenesis across human gut models
Published in Gut Microbes, 2021
Charlène Roussel, Kim De Paepe, Wessam Galia, Jana de Bodt, Sandrine Chalancon, Sylvain Denis, Françoise Leriche, Pascal Vandekerkove, Nathalie Ballet, Stéphanie Blanquet-Diot, Tom Van de Wiele
We first found that the 18-days treatment with the probiotic S. cerevisiae positively affected the structure of the human gut ecosystem simulated in the M-SHIME, compared to the control condition. The induced changes were moreover consistent across gut regions (i.e., ileum lumen, ileum mucus, ascending colon lumen and ascending colon mucus) and donors, with the largest effects being found in the ascending colon. Generally, the community shift induced by probiotic treatment was marked by an upsurge in the abundance of Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium in all gut microbial niches. Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium are considered health promoting bacteria32,33 (Figure 10g) which might augment the defense against harmful bacteria, such as ETEC, by creating an acidic environment, synthesizing exopolysaccharides and bacteriocins, increasing antioxidant activity, producing mediators that may involve the perturbation of quorum sensing, or activating and enhancing local cell-mediated immunity against certain enteric pathogens.32 Other enriched genera related with health were promoted under probiotic treatment, i.e., Veillonella dispar in all gut niches, and Ruminococcaceae, Ruminiclostridium, Faecalibacterium prausnitzii, Fusobacterium, Fusicatenibacter saccharivorans, Intestinimonas in ascending colon lumen and mucus.28,34,35Enterococcus and Providencia were also promoted by probiotic treatment. While some members of these pathobionts might promote disease in disturbed conditions, most of them normally act as commensals, and are even used in probiotic products (e.g., Enterococcus faecalis).36 Under non-treated control condition, a bloom of opportunistic pathogenic species appeared following ETEC challenge, such as Klebsiella variicola, Achromobacter xylosoxidans, and Bilophila wadsworthia. Those genera have been linked to intra-abdominal infections and chronic metabolic disorders.37,38