ArticleThe Indian journal of medical research2020
Antimicrobial susceptibility pattern of
Article in The Indian journal of medical research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Antimicrobial resistance mechanisms, treatment challenges, and emerging strategies inFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Review
- Bacteriophage therapy to combat MDR non-fermenting Gram-negative bacteria causing nosocomial infections: recent progress and challenges.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2025Review
- In Vitro Activity of Cefiderocol and Aztreonam/Avibactam Against Gram-Negative Non-Fermenting Bacteria: A New Strategy Against Highly Antibiotic-Resistant Infectious Agents.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Epidemiology and Antimicrobial Resistance of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia in China, 2014-2021.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2025Article
- Multicenter epidemiology ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
- Burkholderia cepacia complex nosocomial outbreaks in India: A scoping review.The Indian journal of medical research · 2024Article
- Article
- Susceptibility of clinical isolates of novel pathogenJAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2024Article
- Challenges and mitigation strategies associated with Burkholderia cepacia complex contamination in pharmaceutical manufacturing.Archives of microbiology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND &
objectivesWith increased isolation of Burkholderia cepacia complex (Bcc) and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia from clinical specimens, knowledge of their antimicrobial susceptibility trend will aid in better patient management. This study provides a comprehensive picture of this trend over a decade.
methodsA retrospective analysis of laboratory records over 10 years for antimicrobial susceptibility pattern of Bcc and S. maltophilia was carried out. The susceptibility pattern to commonly used antimicrobials was determined using disk diffusion and compared at the beginning, mid and end of the study period.
resultsFive hundred and thirty Bcc and 665 S. maltophilia isolated over the past 10 yr were included in the study. Over the years, susceptibility of Bcc for co-trimoxazole varied as 80, 70 and 89 per cent at the beginning, middle and end of the study, respectively. Susceptibility to tetracycline was 43 per cent at the beginning of the study and that to minocycline was 100 per cent mid-study and 74 per cent at the end. Susceptibility to ceftazidime varied as 83, 60 and 65 per cent, respectively, and to meropenem, increased during the first half of the study and decreased in the second half, as 60, 70 and 43 per cent, respectively. Bcc susceptibility to levofloxacin decreased from 84 (in 2014) to 76 per cent (in 2016). S. maltophilia susceptibility to co-trimoxazole varied as 90, 82 and 87 per cent, respectively, whereas that to levofloxacin was 80, 100 and 94 per cent, respectively, during the start, mid and end of the study. Susceptibility to minocycline decreased from 100 per cent mid-study to 96 per cent at the end. Susceptibility of S. maltophilia to ceftazidime increased from 24 (in 2012) to 37 per cent (in 2016). All variations among the three phases of the study were significant for all antimicrobials tested for both the organisms. INTERPRETATION &
conclusionsWhile Bcc showed increased resistance to ceftazidime, meropenem and minocycline, S. maltophilia maintained >80 per cent susceptibility to minocycline, levofloxacin and co-trimoxazole throughout the decade. By 2016, Bcc was most susceptible to co-trimoxazole, whereas S. maltophilia was most susceptible to minocycline and levofloxacin.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.