Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20038624›Full record

ArticleAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2010

Antimicrobial susceptibilities of multidrug-resistant Campylobacter jejuni and C. coli strains: in vitro activities of 20 antimicrobial agents.

Mirva Lehtopolku, Ulla-Maija Nakari, Pirkko Kotilainen, Pentti Huovinen, Anja Siitonen, Antti J Hakanen

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
6.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 78 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Consortium ofAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Antibiotic Resistance inAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Longitudinal Study of the Distribution of Antimicrobial-ResistantAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021
    Article
  11. New and alternative strategies for the prevention, control, and treatment of antibiotic-resistant Campylobacter.Translational research : the journal of laboratory and clinical medicine · 2020
    Review
  12. Antimicrobial Resistance ofFoodborne pathogens and disease · 2020
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Characterization and Phylogenetic Analysis ofInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Overlap of Antibiotic ResistantFrontiers in microbiology · 2019
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Mirva LehtopolkuAntimicrobial Resistance Unit, National Institute for Health and Welfare (THL), Kiinamyllynkatu 13, 20520 Turku, Finland. mirva.lehtopolku@utu.fi
Ulla-Maija Nakari
Pirkko Kotilainen
Pentti Huovinen
Anja Siitonen
Antti J Hakanen
Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare · FIUniversity of Turku · FICNR de la Résistance aux Antibiotiques · FRTurku University Hospital · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is a paucity of information regarding antimicrobial agents that are suitable to treat severe infections caused by multidrug-resistant Campylobacter spp. Our aim was to identify agents that are potentially effective against multiresistant Campylobacter strains. The in vitro activities of 20 antimicrobial agents against 238 Campylobacter strains were analyzed by determining MICs by the agar plate dilution method or the Etest. These strains were selected from 1,808 Campylobacter isolates collected from Finnish patients between 2003 and 2005 and screened for macrolide susceptibility by using the disk diffusion test. The 238 strains consisted of 183 strains with erythromycin inhibition zone diameters of < or =23 mm and 55 strains with inhibition zone diameters of >23 mm. Of the 238 Campylobacter strains, 19 were resistant to erythromycin by MIC determinations (MIC > or = 16 microg/ml). Given that the resistant strains were identified among the collection of 1,808 isolates, the frequency of erythromycin resistance was 1.1%. All erythromycin-resistant strains were multidrug resistant, with 18 (94.7%) of them being resistant to ciprofloxacin (MIC > or = 4 microg/ml). The percentages of resistance to tetracycline and amoxicillin-clavulanic acid (co-amoxiclav) were 73.7% and 31.6%, respectively. All macrolide-resistant strains were susceptible to imipenem, meropenem, and tigecycline. Ten (52.6%) multiresistant strains were identified as being Campylobacter jejuni strains, and 9 (47.4%) were identified as being C. coli strains. These data demonstrate that the incidence of macrolide resistance was low but that the macrolide-resistant Campylobacter strains were uniformly multidrug resistant. In addition to the carbapenems, tigecycline was also highly effective against these multidrug-resistant Campylobacter strains in vitro. Its efficacy for the treatment of human campylobacteriosis should be evaluated in clinical trials.

Indexed as

Drug Resistance, Multiple, BacterialAnti-Bacterial AgentsCampylobacter coliCampylobacter InfectionsCampylobacter jejuniCarbapenemsErythromycinFecesFinlandHumansMacrolidesMicrobial Sensitivity TestsMinocyclineTigecyclineAnti-Bacterial AgentsCarbapenemsErythromycinMacrolidesMinocyclineTigecycline

Identifiers

PMID20038624
PMCPMC2825995
OpenAlexW2018919557

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.