Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38880888›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of medical research2024

In-vitro evaluation of different antimicrobial combinations with and without colistin against carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii clinical isolates.

Tuba Müderris, Gülden Dursun Manyaslı, Nurbanu Sezak, Selçuk Kaya, Tuna Demirdal, Süreyya Gül Yurtsever

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of medical research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
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.

Tuba MüderrisFaculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Microbiology, İzmir Katip Çelebi University, İzmir, Türkiye. tubamuderris@yahoo.com.
Gülden Dursun ManyaslıCizre Dr. Selahattin Cizrelioğlu Public Hospital, Department of Medical Microbiology, Şırnak, Türkiye.
Nurbanu SezakFaculty of Medicine, Department of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology, İzmir Demokrasi University, İzmir, Türkiye.
Selçuk KayaFaculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Microbiology, İzmir Katip Çelebi University, İzmir, Türkiye.
Tuna DemirdalFaculty of Medicine, Department of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology, İzmir Katip Çelebi University, İzmir, Türkiye.
Süreyya Gül YurtseverFaculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Microbiology, İzmir Katip Çelebi University, İzmir, Türkiye.

Funding

İzmir Katip Çelebi University Scientific Research Projects 2018.GAP.TIPF.0006
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCarbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (CRAB) infections are one of the most common causes of nosocomial infections and have high mortality rates due to difficulties in treatment. In this study, the in vitro synergistic interactions of the colistin (CT)-meropenem (MEM) combination and patient clinical outcomes were compared in CRAB-infected patients that receive CT-MEM antimicrobial combination therapy. In addition, in vitro synergistic interactions of MEM-ertapenem (ETP), MEM-fosfomycin (FF) and CT-FF antimicrobial combinations were investigated. Finally, the epsilometer (E) test and checkerboard test results were compared and the compatibility of these two tests was evaluated.

methodsTwenty-one patients were included in the study. Bacterial identification was performed with MALDI-TOF, and antimicrobial susceptibility was assessed with an automated system. Synergy studies were performed using the E test and checkerboard method.

resultsFor the checkerboard method, the synergy rates for CT-MEM, MEM-FF, MEM-ETP and CT-FF were 100%, 52.3%, 23.8% and 28.5%, respectively. In the E test synergy tests, synergistic effects were detected for two isolates each in the CT-MEM and CT-FF combinations. Microbial eradication was achieved in nine (52.9%) of the 17 patients that received CT-MEM combination therapy. The agreement between the E test and the checkerboard test was 6.5%.

conclusionsA synergistic effect was found with the checkerboard method for the CT-MEM combination in all isolates in our study, and approximately 70% of the patients benefited from treatment with this combination. In addition, more than half of the isolates showed a synergistic effect for the MEM-FF combination. Combinations of CT-MEM and MEM-FF may be options for the treatment of CRAB infections. However, a comprehensive understanding of the potential of the microorganism to develop resistant mutants under applied exposures, as well as factors that directly affect antimicrobial activity, such as pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics, is essential for providing treatment advice. We found a low rate of agreement between the E test method and the checkerboard test method in our study, in contrast to the literature. Comprehensive studies that compare clinical results with methods are needed to determine the ideal synergy test and interpretation method.

Indexed as

Acinetobacter baumanniiAcinetobacter InfectionsAnti-Bacterial AgentsCarbapenemsColistinMicrobial Sensitivity TestsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overDrug SynergismDrug Therapy, CombinationFemaleHumansMaleMeropenemMiddle AgedAnti-Bacterial AgentsCarbapenemsColistinMeropenemCarbapenem resistance Acinetobacter baumanniiCheckerboard assaysCombined antibiotic therapyEpsilometer test synergy assaysIn vitro antimicrobial interactions

Identifiers

PMID38880888
PMCPMC11180387

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.