Evidence Hub

Effectiveness of antibiotic combination therapy as evaluated by the Break-point Checkerboard Plate method for multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa in clinical use

Nakamura I, Yamaguchi T, Tsukimori A, Sato A, Fukushima S, Mizuno Y, Matsumoto T

Journal of infection and chemotherapy : official journal of the Japan Society of Chemotherapy, 2014

28 participants

Abstract

Multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (MDRP) strains are defined as having resistance to the following 3 groups of antibiotics: carbapenems, aminoglycosides, and fluoroquinolones. Antibiotic combinations have demonstrated increased activity in vitro compared with a single agent. As an in vitro method of determining the combination activity of antibiotics, the Break-point Checkerboard Plate (BC-plate) can be used routinely in clinical microbiology laboratories. We evaluated the effectiveness of the BC-plate for MDRP infections in clinical settings. We retrospectively selected cases of MDRP infection treated with combination therapy of antibiotics in Tokyo Medical University Hospital (1015 beds), Tokyo, Japan, from November 2010 to October 2012. A total of 28 MDRP strains were clinically isolated from 28 patients during the study period. This study design is a case series of MDRP infection. Six infections among the 28 patients were treated based on the results of the BC-plate assay, and the 6 strains tested positive for MBL. One patient had pneumonia, 3 had urinary tract infections, 1 had vertebral osteomyelitis, and 1 had nasal abscess. The combination of aztreonam with amikacin demonstrated the most frequently recognized in vitro effect (5 patients). Next, aztreonam with ciprofloxacin and piperacillin with amikacin revealed equivalent in vitro effects (3 patients, respectively). The clinical cure rate was 83.3% (5/6 patients). Antibiotic combination therapy based on the…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 28 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free