Previous Article | Next Article 
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, July 2003, p. 3339-3343, Vol. 41, No. 7
0095-1137/03/$08.00+0 DOI: 10.1128/JCM.41.7.3339-3343.2003
Copyright © 2003, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
Comparison of Four Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing Methods To Determine the In Vitro Activities of Piperacillin and Piperacillin-Tazobactam against Clinical Isolates of Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa
James A. Karlowsky,1* Mellany K. Weaver,1 Clyde Thornsberry,1 Michael J. Dowzicky,2 Mark E. Jones,1 and Daniel F. Sahm1
Focus Technologies, Herndon, Virginia 20171,1
Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Saint Davids, Pennsylvania 190872
Received 28 February 2003/
Returned for modification 27 March 2003/
Accepted 8 April 2003
Susceptibility to piperacillin was similar to that to piperacillin-tazobactam (<1% difference) for 6,938 isolates of Enterobacter aerogenes and 13,954 isolates of Enterobacter cloacae tested using a Vitek system; for the same species, in contrast, susceptibility rates to piperacillin-tazobactam were 5.9 to 13.9% higher than to piperacillin using disk diffusion, MicroScan, and Vitek 2 testing. Unprecedented phenotypes (piperacillin susceptible and piperacillin-tazobactam intermediate; piperacillin intermediate and piperacillin-tazobactam resistant; piperacillin susceptible and piperacillin-tazobactam resistant) accounted for 6.1% of the results for E. aerogenes isolates and 6.0% of the results for E. cloacae isolates tested with the Vitek system.
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Focus Technologies, 13665 Dulles Technology Dr., Suite 200, Herndon, VA 20171-4603. Phone: (703) 480-2575. Fax: (703) 480-2654. E-mail:
jkarlowsky{at}focusanswers.com.
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, July 2003, p. 3339-3343, Vol. 41, No. 7
0095-1137/03/$08.00+0 DOI: 10.1128/JCM.41.7.3339-3343.2003
Copyright © 2003, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Torres, E., Villanueva, R., Bou, G.
(2009). Comparison of different methods of determining {beta}-lactam susceptibility in clinical strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Med Microbiol
58: 625-629
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Mazzariol, A., Aldegheri, M., Ligozzi, M., Lo Cascio, G., Koncan, R., Fontana, R.
(2008). Performance of Vitek 2 in Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing of Pseudomonas aeruginosa Isolates with Different Mechanisms of {beta}-Lactam Resistance. J. Clin. Microbiol.
46: 2095-2098
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Nayak, R., Call, V., Kaldhone, P., Tyler, C., Anderson, G., Phillips, S., Kerdahi, K., Foley, S. L.
(2007). Comparison of Salmonella enterica serovar Heidelberg Susceptibility Testing Results. Clin Med Res
5: 98-105
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Menozzi, M. G., Eigner, U., Covan, S., Rossi, S., Somenzi, P., Dettori, G., Chezzi, C., Fahr, A.-M.
(2006). Two-Center Collaborative Evaluation of Performance of the BD Phoenix Automated Microbiology System for Identification and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing of Gram-Negative Bacteria. J. Clin. Microbiol.
44: 4085-4094
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Sader, H. S., Fritsche, T. R., Jones, R. N.
(2006). Accuracy of Three Automated Systems (MicroScan WalkAway, VITEK, and VITEK 2) for Susceptibility Testing of Pseudomonas aeruginosa against Five Broad-Spectrum Beta-Lactam Agents.. J. Clin. Microbiol.
44: 1101-1104
[Abstract]
[Full Text]