Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24008826›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy2014

Fourth Belgian multicentre survey of antibiotic susceptibility of anaerobic bacteria.

Ingrid Wybo, Dorien Van den Bossche, Oriane Soetens, Evilien Vekens, Kristof Vandoorslaer, Geert Claeys, Youri Glupczynski, Margareta Ieven, Pierrette Melin, Claire Nonhoff and 3 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 164 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Metronidazole Susceptibility Patterns in EuropeanMedical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. ThePeerJ · 2025
    Review
  6. The emergence of metronidazole-resistantMicrobiology spectrum · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Distribution, Trends, and Antimicrobial Susceptibility ofOpen forum infectious diseases · 2023
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Bacteremia caused by Clostridium sporogenes in an oncological patient.Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2020
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

13 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Ingrid WyboDepartment of Microbiology and Infection Control, Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Laarbeeklaan 101, 1090 Brussels, Belgium.
Dorien Van den Bossche
Oriane Soetens
Evilien Vekens
Kristof Vandoorslaer
Geert Claeys
Youri Glupczynski
Margareta Ieven
Pierrette Melin
Claire Nonhoff
Hector Rodriguez-Villalobos
Jan Verhaegen
Denis Piérard
Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel · BEUniversitair Ziekenhuis Leuven · BECentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège · BECHU Dinant Godinne UCL Namur · BECliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc · BEErasmus Hospital · BEVrije Universiteit Brussel · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo collect recent data on the susceptibility of anaerobes to antimicrobial agents with known activity against anaerobes, and to compare them with results from previous Belgian multicentre studies.

methodsFour hundred and three strict anaerobic clinical isolates were prospectively collected from February 2011 to April 2012 in eight Belgian university hospitals. MICs were determined by one central laboratory for 11 antimicrobial agents using Etest methodology.

resultsAccording to EUCAST breakpoints, >90% of isolates were susceptible to amoxicillin/clavulanate (94%), piperacillin/tazobactam (91%), meropenem (96%), metronidazole (92%) and chloramphenicol (98%), but only 70% and 40% to clindamycin and penicillin, respectively. At CLSI recommended breakpoints, only 71% were susceptible to moxifloxacin and 79% to cefoxitin. MIC50/MIC90 values for linezolid and for tigecycline were 1/4 and 0.5/4 mg/L, respectively. When compared with survey data from 2004, no major differences in susceptibility profiles were noticed. However, the susceptibility of Prevotella spp. and other Gram-negative bacilli to clindamycin decreased from 91% in 1993-94 and 82% in 2004 to 69% in this survey. Furthermore, the susceptibility of clostridia to moxifloxacin decreased from 88% in 2004 to 66% in 2011-12 and that of fusobacteria from 90% to 71%.

conclusionsCompared with previous surveys, little evolution was seen in susceptibility, except a decline in activity of clindamycin against Prevotella spp. and other Gram-negative bacteria, and of moxifloxacin against clostridia. Since resistance was detected to all antibiotics, susceptibility testing of anaerobic isolates is indicated in severe infections to confirm appropriateness of antimicrobial therapy.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsBacteria, AnaerobicBacterial InfectionsBelgiumDrug Resistance, BacterialHospitals, UniversityHumansMicrobial Sensitivity TestsPrevalenceAnti-Bacterial AgentsanaerobesEtestsurveillance

Identifiers

PMID24008826
PMCPMC3861333
OpenAlexW2126661068

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.