Relationship Between Teicoplanin Use and Increase in Minimal Inhibitor Concentrations of Coagulase-Negative Staphylococci (original) (raw)
Related papers
Clinical evaluation of teicoplanin for therapy of severe infections caused by gram-positive bacteria
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, 1986
Teicoplanin was evaluated in 47 patients with severe infections, including 14 patients with bone infections, 11 patients with soft-tissue infections, 7 patients with endocarditis, 5 patients with pneumonia, 3 patients with septic thrombophlebitis, 3 patients with septicemia of unknown origin, and 4 patients with miscellaneous infections. Overall, bacteremia was documented in 24 patients. The pathogens isolated were 35 strains of Staphylococcus aureus (including 8 methicillin-resistant strains), 4 strains of Staphylococcus epidermidis, 4 strains of Streptococcus faecalis, 2 strains of Streptococcus pneumoniae, 5 strains of other streptococci, and 1 Micrococcus luteus strain. A total of 22 patients (46.8%) were clinically cured, 8 patients (17.0%) improved, 2 patients (4.3%) had relapses after initial improvement, and 15 patients (31.9%) failed to respond. The results were better in nonbacteremic patients (19 of 23 patients [82.6%] were cured or improved) than in patients with bacteremia (12 of 24 patients [50%] were cured or improved). Bacteriological cure occurred in 25 patients (53.2%), and superinfections were documented in 6 patients (12.8%). No major adverse effects were observed. We conclude that teicoplanin is a potentially effective and well-tolerated antimicrobial agent for therapy of nonbacteremic infections caused by gram-positive bacteria.
Poor efficacy of teicoplanin in treatment of deep-seated staphylococcal infections
European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, 1988
Teieoplanin in a 400 mg intravenous loading dose followed by 200 mg/day intravenously or intramuscularly was given to 19 patients with deep-seated staphylococcal infections. Only eight patients (44.4 %) were considered cured, failure mostly being observed in patients with osteomyelitis, endoearditis and baeteremia. Poor tissue kinetics of teicoplanin and the presence of foreign bodies are probable explanations for the reported failures. Future trials using a higher dose of teicoplanin with or without the addition of rifampiein or gentamicin seem to be justified.
Teicoplanin is an antibiotic used in the prevention and treatment of serious infections caused by Gram-positive bacteria, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and Enterococcus faecalis. It is a semi-synthetic glycopeptide antibiotic with a spectrum of activities similar to vancomycin. Its mechanism of action is inhibition of bacterial cell wall synthesis teicoplanin is marketed by Sanofi Aventis Coperation under the brand name of Targocid. It has been shown that oral administration of teicoplanin is effective in the treatment of Pseudomembranous colitis and Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhoea, with comparable efficacy to vancomycin.The effectiveness of this antibiotic is associated with its carbon chain length.It's tried in this review article to introduce teicoplanin synthases, structure and its structure effect on treatment and also introduce the advantages of teicoplanin in bacterial infection treatment and compared its effects with some other antibiotics like vancomycin and linezolid.Based on the above data, it can be concluded that teicoplanin usage, specially intervenes injection of it, is a successful antibiotic treatment against bacterial infections caused by Gram-positive bacteria, particularly methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aurous (MRSA). The teicoplanin effect is directly related to the length of its carbon chain. It was shown that treatment with combination of teicoplanin and vancomycin or teicoplanin and linezolid have more influence over the treatment process. The most important advantage of teicoplanin usage in treatments is its lower side effects on patients than other antibiotics.
Zentralblatt für Bakteriologie, 1993
Segments (1 em in length) of a central venous catheter (Hydrocath®) coated with teicoplanin, or uncoated, were inserted subcutaneously into mice and Staphylococcus aureus or Staphylococcus epidermidis were inoculated nearby. At 24 and 48 h after infection, the mean titre of adherent bacteria (recovered by sonication) for the teicoplanin-coated catheters was less than 10 CFU as compared to more than 10 4 CFU (S. aureus) and 10 3 CFU (S. epidermidis) from the uncoated catheters. In the S. au reus infection, teicoplanin coating also prevented the formation of abscesses which were observed around uncoated catheters. Zusammenfassung Ein em lange Segmente eines zentralvenosen Katheters (Hydrocath®), die mit dem Glykopeptid Teicoplanin beschichtet waren, wurden subcutan in Mause implantiert. Zur Erzeugung einer Infektion wurden entweder Staphylococcus aureus oder Staphylococcus epidermidis in der Nahe der Implantationsstelle eingeimpft. 24 h bzw. 48 h nach Bakterieninokulation war die Anzahl adharenter Bakterien (bestimmt durch Ultraschallablosung mit anschlieBender Keimzahlbestimmung) am Teicoplanin-beschichteten Katheter kleiner als 10 cfu, wogegen bei den unbeschichteten Kathetern Adhasionswerte von mehr als 10 4 cfu (S. aureus) bzw. 10 3 cfu (S. epidermidis) gefunden wurden. 1m Faile von S. aureus wurde bei unbeschichteten Kathetern AbszeBbildung beobachtet, bei den Teicoplaninbeschichteten Kathetern wurde keine AbszeBbildung beobachtet.
TEICOPLANIN RESISTANCE IN GRAM-POSITIVE BACTERIAL ISOLATE: AN EMERGING THREAT
Asian Journal of Pharmaceutical and Clinical Research Journal, 2021
Objectives: Development of antimicrobial resistance in microorganism isolated from blood stream infection constitutes a major concern about their treatment. Teicoplanin is a glycopeptide antibiotic used in the treatment of infection caused by Gram-positive bacteria. This study was planned to determine Teicoplanin resistance in the Central India and recommend policy changes for prevention of the future resistance to the higher antibiotics. Methods: A total of 1855 septicemia suspected blood samples were studied. The blood culture samples were processed and identified in the microbiology laboratory according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines. Antibiotic susceptibility test was done using Kirby B disk diffusion method. Results: About 39.5% of blood culture samples showed positive growth for organism. We observed high teicoplanin resistance (29.5%) among Grampositive isolates, predominantly (53%) in the Enterococcus species. Conclusion: Teicoplanin resistance has emerged tremendously in the present study. Hence, attention is required about this serious issue otherwise very limited choice of antibiotics will be available for treating infections in the future.
Southern African Journal of Infectious Diseases, 2015
Teicoplanin is an effective treatment option against methicillin-resistant, Gram-positive bacteria, like Staphylococcus aureus. It is a glycopeptide antibiotic, produced through microbial fermentation, a process resulting in variations in the N-acyl side chain. Concerns that these variations may affect the pharmacokinetic profile and the clinical efficacy of generic teicoplanin preparations have been raised. Method: To address this issue, a multi-centre observational study was conducted to evaluate steady-state peak and trough serum concentrations, and the serum bactericidal activity (SBA) and safety of a generic teicoplanin preparation in critically ill patients. Additionally, the composition of the generic teicoplanin was compared to that of the innovator drug to assess differences in the composition. Results: Following predetermined loading and maintenance dose schedules, the mean peak and trough teicoplanin serum concentrations were 20.98 mg/l and 10.38 mg/l, respectively. A statistically significant association was observed between teicoplanin pharmacotherapy and increased ex vivo SBA. It was found using independent analysis that the composition of the generic teicoplanin preparation was similar to that of the innovator drug, and that both formulations met the European Pharmacopoeia specifications. Conclusion: The loading and maintenance schedules employed in this study were effective in establishing therapeutic serum teicoplanin concentrations in critically ill patients. Evidence of bactericidal activity measured in patients' ex vivo serum samples, following treatment with the generic preparation, supports this finding.