Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26677253›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2016

Synergy of β-Lactams with Vancomycin against Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus: Correlation of Disk Diffusion and Checkerboard Methods.

Cheng Len Sy, Tsi-Shu Huang, Chii Shiang Chen, Yao-Shen Chen, Hung-Chin Tsai, Shue-Renn Wann, Kuan-Sheng Wu, Jui-Kuang Chen, Susan Shin-Jung Lee, Yung-Ching Liu

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Infection and drug resistance · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Clinically Approved Drugs Inhibit theFrontiers in microbiology · 2019
    Article
  10. 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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Cheng Len SyDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Tsi-Shu HuangDivision of Microbiology, Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Chii Shiang ChenDivision of Microbiology, Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Yao-Shen ChenDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Hung-Chin TsaiDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Shue-Renn WannDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Kuan-Sheng WuDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Jui-Kuang ChenDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Susan Shin-Jung LeeDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan ssjlee28@yahoo.com.tw.
Yung-Ching LiuDivision of Infectious Diseases, Shuang-Ho Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital · TWNational Yang Ming Chiao Tung University · TWNational Yang Ming Chiao Tung University · TWTaipei Medical University-Shuang Ho Hospital · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Modified disk diffusion (MDD) and checkerboard tests were employed to assess the synergy of combinations of vancomycin and β-lactam antibiotics for 59 clinical isolates of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and Mu50 (ATCC 700699). Bacterial inocula equivalent to 0.5 and 2.0 McFarland standard were inoculated on agar plates containing 0, 0.5, 1, and 2 μg/ml of vancomycin. Oxacillin-, cefazolin-, and cefoxitin-impregnated disks were applied to the surface, and the zones of inhibition were measured at 24 h. The CLSI-recommended checkerboard method was used as a reference to detect synergy. The MICs for vancomycin were determined using the Etest method, broth microdilution, and the Vitek 2 automated system. Synergy was observed with the checkerboard method in 51% to 60% of the isolates when vancomycin was combined with any β-lactam. The fractional inhibitory concentration indices were significantly lower in MRSA isolates with higher vancomycin MIC combinations (P < 0.05). The overall agreement between the MDD and checkerboard methods to detect synergy in MRSA isolates with bacterial inocula equivalent to McFarland standard 0.5 were 33.0% and 62.5% for oxacillin, 45.1% and 52.4% for cefazolin, and 43.1% and 52.4% for cefoxitin when combined with 0.5 and 2 μg/ml of vancomycin, respectively. Based on our study, the simple MDD method is not recommended as a replacement for the checkerboard method to detect synergy. However, it may serve as an initial screening method for the detection of potential synergy when it is not feasible to perform other labor-intensive synergy tests.

Indexed as

Drug SynergismAnti-Bacterial Agentsbeta-LactamsHumansMethicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureusMicrobial Sensitivity TestsVancomycinAnti-Bacterial Agentsbeta-LactamsVancomycin

Identifiers

PMID26677253
PMCPMC4767953
OpenAlexW2243885259

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.