Log In Sign up
The largest database of trusted experimental protocols
> Chemicals & Drugs > Antibiotic > Ertapenem

Ertapenem

Ertapenem is a broad-spectrum carbapenem antibiotic used to treat a variety of bacterial infections.
It has activity against many Gram-positive and Gram-negative aerobic and anaerobic bacteria, including extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Enterobacteriaceae.
Ertapenem is typically administered intravenously or intramuscularly and is metabolized in the liver.
It is an important treatment option for complicated infections where antibiotic resistance is a concern.
Researchers can use PubCompare.ai to optimize their Ertapenem studies by locating the best protocols from literature, preprints, and patents, and leveraging AI-driven comparisons to enhance reproducibility and accuracy in their research.

Most cited protocols related to «Ertapenem»

1
National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) Pathogens Report
Cited 14 times
The CLABSIs,7 CAUTIs,8 select VAEs,9 and SSIs10 that occurred between 2015–2017 and had been reported to the NHSN’s Patient Safety Component as of July 1, 2018, were included in this report. These HAIs were reported by acute-care hospitals, critical access hospitals, LTACHs, and IRFs from all US states and territories. Unless otherwise noted, CLABSI data included events classified as mucosal barrier injury laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infection (MBI-LCBI). VAE data were limited to events classified as possible ventilator-associated pneumonia (PVAP) because this is the only subtype of VAE for which a pathogen can be reported. Asymptomatic bacteremic urinary tract infections, CLABSIs reported from IRFs, and outpatient SSIs were excluded.
The NHSN protocols provide guidance for attributing device-associated (DA) HAIs (ie, CLABSIs, CAUTIs, and PVAPs) to a CDC-defined location type, and SSIs to a CDC operative procedure code. Due to known differences in pathogens and resistance patterns between adult and pediatric populations,11 ,12 (link) this report was limited to DA HAIs attributed to adult location types, and to SSIs that occurred in patients ≥18 years old at the time of surgery. Comparable data from pediatric locations and patients are described in a companion report.13 (link)Unless otherwise noted, DA HAIs were stratified into 5 mutually exclusive location categories: hospital wards (inclusive of step-down, mixed acuity, and specialty care areas), hospital intensive care units (ICUs), hospital oncology units (ie, oncology ICUs and wards), LTACHs (ie, LTACH ICUs and wards), and IRFs (ie, freestanding IRFs and CMS-certified IRF units located within a hospital). SSI data were stratified into mutually exclusive surgical categories based on the operative procedure code. Pathogen distributions were also analyzed separately for each operative procedure code and are available in the online supplement.14 Up to 3 pathogens and their antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) results can be reported to the NHSN for each HAI. The AST results for the drugs included in this analysis were reported using the interpretive categories of “susceptible” (S), “intermediate” (I), “resistant” (R), or “not tested.” Instead of “intermediate,” cefepime had the category interpretation of “intermediate/susceptible-dose dependent” (I/S-DD), which was treated as I for this analysis. Laboratories are expected to follow current guidelines from the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) for AST.15 Naming conventions for pathogens generally adhered to the Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine Clinical Terms (SNOMED CT) Preferred Term.16 In some cases, pathogens were grouped by genus or clinically recognized group (eg, viridans group streptococci) (Appendices A2–A4 online). Results for Klebsiella spp were limited to K. pneumoniae and K. oxytoca; K. aerogenes was considered part of Enterobacter spp due to the timing of the NHSN’s adoption of its name change.17 (link)Staphylococcus aureus was defined as methicillin-resistant (MRSA) if the isolate was reported as R to oxacillin, cefoxitin, or methicillin. Enterococcus spp isolates were defined as vancomycin-resistant (VRE) if they tested R to vancomycin. VRE data were analyzed for all HAIs except PVAP because Enterococcus spp are excluded from the NHSN’s PVAP surveillance definition under most scenarios. Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) were defined as Klebsiella spp, Escherichia coli, or Enterobacter spp that tested R to imipenem, meropenem, doripenem, or ertapenem. All other pathogen-antimicrobial combinations (phenotypes) were described using a metric for nonsusceptibility, which included pathogens that tested I or R to the applicable drugs. To be defined as nonsusceptible to extended-spectrum cephalosporins (ESCs), pathogens must have tested I or R to either ceftazidime or cefepime (Pseudomonas aeruginosa) or to ceftazidime, cefepime, ceftriaxone, or cefotaxime (Klebsiella spp and E. coli). For Enterobacter spp, evaluation of nonsusceptibility to ESCs was limited to cefepime due to Enterobacter’s inducible resistance to other ESCs. Fluoroquinolone nonsusceptibility was defined as a result of I or R to either ciprofloxacin or levofloxacin (P. aeruginosa) or to ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, or moxifloxacin (E. coli). Carbapenem nonsusceptibility in P. aeruginosa and Acinetobacter spp was defined as a result of I or R to imipenem, meropenem, or doripenem. Nonsusceptibility to aminoglycosides was defined as a result of I or R to gentamicin, amikacin, or tobramycin. Finally, multi-drug-resistance (MDR) was approximated by adapting previously established definitions18 (link) that require nonsusceptibility to at least 1 agent within 3 different drug classes. For Enterobacteriaceae and P. aeruginosa, 5 classes were considered in the criteria: ESCs (or cefepime for Enterobacter spp), fluoroquinolones, aminoglycosides, carbapenems, and piperacillin (PIP) or piperacillin/tazobactam (PIPTAZ). A sixth class, ampicillin/sulbactam, was included in the criteria for Acinetobacter spp.
Data were analyzed using SAS version 9.4 software (SAS Institute, Cary, NC). For all HAIs and pathogens, absolute frequencies and distributions were calculated by HAI, location, and surgical category. The 15 most commonly reported pathogens were identified, and their frequencies and ranks within each stratum were calculated. A pooled mean percentage nonsusceptible (%NS) was calculated for each phenotype as the sum of nonsusceptible (or resistant) pathogens, divided by the sum of pathogens tested for susceptibility, and multiplied by 100. Percentage NS was not calculated for any phenotype for which <20 pathogens were tested. Differences in the %NS across location types or surgical categories were assessed for statistical significance using a mid-P exact test, and P < .05 was considered statistically significant. The percentage of pathogens with reported susceptibility results (referred to as “percentage tested”) is defined elsewhere3 (link) and was calculated for each bacterial phenotype, as well as for select Candida spp. Pathogens and susceptibility data for CLABSIs categorized as MBI-LCBI were analyzed separately and are presented in the online supplement.14 “Selective reporting” occurs when laboratories suppress AST results as part of antimicrobial stewardship efforts. This practice could contribute to a higher number of pathogens reported to the NHSN as “not tested” to certain drugs. To assess the impact of selective reporting on the national %NS, we applied an alternate calculation for CRE and ESC nonsusceptibility. If a pathogen was reported as “not tested” to carbapenems, susceptibility was inferred as S if the pathogen tested susceptible to at least 2 of the following: ampicillin, ampicillin/sulbactam, amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, PIPTAZ, cefazolin, cefoxitin, or cefotetan. If a pathogen was reported as “not tested” to ESCs, susceptibility was inferred as S if the pathogen tested susceptible to at least 2 of the following: ampicillin, aztreonam, or cefazolin. Therefore, the number of tested isolates increases under the alternate calculation. Percentage NS was calculated using both the traditional (ie, strictly as reported) and alternate approaches.
Statistical analyses were not performed to test for temporal changes in the %NS; thus, this report does not convey any conclusions regarding changes in resistance over time. Due to differences in the stratification levels, inclusion criteria, and patient populations, the %NS values in this report should not be compared to those published in previous iterations of this report.
Weiner-Lastinger L.M., Abner S., Edwards J.R., Kallen A.J., Karlsson M., Magill S.S., Pollock D., See I., Soe M.M., Walters M.S, & Dudeck M.A. (2019). Antimicrobial-resistant pathogens associated with adult healthcare-associated infections: Summary of data reported to the National Healthcare Safety Network, 2015–2017. Infection control and hospital epidemiology, 41(1), 1-18.
Publication 2019
Acinetobacter Adult Amikacin Aminoglycosides Amox clav Ampicillin ampicillin-sulbactam Antimicrobial Stewardship Asymptomatic Infections Aztreonam Bacteremia Bacteria Blood Circulation Candida Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae Carbapenems Cefazolin Cefepime Cefotaxime Cefotetan Cefoxitin Ceftazidime Ceftriaxone Cephalosporins Ciprofloxacin Clinical Laboratory Services Conferences Dietary Supplements Doripenem Enterobacter Enterobacteriaceae Enterococcus Ertapenem Escherichia coli Fluoroquinolones Gentamicin Imipenem Injuries Klebsiella Klebsiella oxytoca Klebsiella pneumoniae Laboratory Infection Lanugo Levofloxacin Medical Devices Meropenem Methicillin Methicillin-Resistant Microbicides Moxifloxacin Mucous Membrane Multi-Drug Resistance Neoplasms Operative Surgical Procedures Outpatients Oxacillin pathogenesis Patients Patient Safety Pets Pharmaceutical Preparations Phenotype Piperacillin Piperacillin-Tazobactam Combination Product Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated polyvinylacetate phthalate polymer Population Group Pseudomonas aeruginosa Sepsis Staphylococcus aureus Infection Streptococcus viridans Substance Abuse Detection Susceptibility, Disease Tobramycin Urinary Tract Vancomycin Vancomycin Resistance Wound Infection
2
Surveillance of E. coli Bacteraemia Resistance
Cited 13 times
A total of 1522 E. coli isolates were initially included in the study. Of these, 1098 were from the BSAC Bacteraemia Resistance Surveillance Programme (www.bsacsurv.org) (Reynolds et al. 2008 ) between 2001 and 2011 (Supplemental Table S2). Up to 10 isolates (when available) were obtained for each year from 11 contributing laboratories distributed across England. The 11 centers were selected in order to provide geographical and temporal diversity. A further 424 isolates were sourced from the diagnostic laboratory at the CUH. Using the laboratory database, we selected every third isolate associated with bacteremia that had been stored in the −80°C freezer archive between 2006 and 2012. Thirteen isolates were subsequently excluded (four CUH isolates and nine BSAC isolates) based on the low quality of sequence data or species misidentification, giving a final sample size of 1509 isolates. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed using the Vitek2 instrument with the N206 card (bioMerieux) for isolates from the CUH and using the agar dilution method for the BSAC collection (Andrews 2001 (link)). For the purposes of this analysis, we combined phenotypic antibiotic-resistance data from BSAC and CUH and grouped together the intermediate and resistant isolates in the analyses to represent the nonsusceptible part of the population. Since the isolates from the BSAC and CUH have been tested against different antibiotic combinations, we have antibiotic resistance data from 2001–2011 for amoxicillin and imipenem; from 2006–2012 for amikacin, tobramycin, ampicillin, ertapenem, meropenem, aztreoman, cefalotin, cefoxitin, cefepime, and trimethoprim; and throughout the study period (2001–2012) for gentamicin, tigecycline, cefuroxime, ceftazidime, cefotaxime, ciprofloxacin, amoxicillin-clavulanic acid, and piperacillin-tazobactam.
The National Research Ethics Service (ref. 12/EE/0439) and the CUH Research and Development (R&D) Department approved the study protocol.
Kallonen T., Brodrick H.J., Harris S.R., Corander J., Brown N.M., Martin V., Peacock S.J, & Parkhill J. (2017). Systematic longitudinal survey of invasive Escherichia coli in England demonstrates a stable population structure only transiently disturbed by the emergence of ST131. Genome Research, 27(8), 1437-1449.
Full text: Click here
Publication 2017
Agar Amikacin Amox clav Amoxicillin Ampicillin Antibiotic Resistance, Microbial Antibiotics Bacteremia Cefepime Cefotaxime Cefoxitin Ceftazidime Cefuroxime Cephalothin Ciprofloxacin Diagnosis Ertapenem Escherichia coli Gentamicin Imipenem Meropenem Microbicides Phenotype Piperacillin-Tazobactam Combination Product Susceptibility, Disease Technique, Dilution Tigecycline Tobramycin Trimethoprim
3
Antibiotic Resistance Profiling of E. coli
Cited 11 times
The prospective hospital-based study was conducted in the Department of Microbiology in a tertiary care and referral center from September 1st, 2016 to August 31st, 2017. Mid-stream urine specimens from suspected UTIs were cultured on HiCrome UTI Agar (HiMedia, Mumbai, India). E. coli strains with significant colony counts (>10[5 (link)] CFU/ml) were included in the study for AST. AST was carried out on Mueller-Hinton agar (Becton Dickinson, Maryland, USA) using a lawn of McFarland 0.5 in normal saline. Each isolate was subjected to a first-line antimicrobial panel consisting of eight antibiotics such as ceftazidime, ceftriaxone, ertapenem, gentamicin, ciprofloxacin, nitrofurantoin, piperacillin-tazobactam, and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole by disc diffusion as per the CLSI guidelines. Any E. coli isolate which was found to be resistant to at least six of these agents was further tested for carbapenem (imipenem and meropenem) susceptibility by E-test (bioMerieux, France) and the results were interpreted as susceptible (S), intermediate susceptible (IS) and resistant (R) following CLSI 2016 and EUCAST 6.0 (2016) guidelines and compared[1 2 ] and subsequently by their 2017 versions.[3 4 ] ATCC E. coli 25922 was used as the quality control reference strain.
Sahu C., Jain V., Mishra P, & Prasad K.N. (2018). Clinical and laboratory standards institute versus European committee for antimicrobial susceptibility testing guidelines for interpretation of carbapenem antimicrobial susceptibility results for Escherichia coli in urinary tract infection (UTI). Journal of Laboratory Physicians, 10(3), 289-293.
Publication 2018
Agar Antibiotics Carbapenems Ceftazidime Ceftriaxone Ciprofloxacin Diffusion Ertapenem Escherichia coli Gentamicin Imipenem Meropenem Microbicides Nitrofurantoin Normal Saline Piperacillin-Tazobactam Combination Product Strains Susceptibility, Disease Trimethoprim-Sulfamethoxazole Combination Urine
4
Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring in Salmonella and E. coli
Cited 7 times
To provide continuity of monitoring data and allow epidemiological tracing of isolates with particular patterns of resistance (particularly in relation to certain Salmonella serovars), it is recommended that those antimicrobials listed in previous recommendations should remain in future testing requirements. The rationale for inclusion of the antimicrobials recommended for use in current monitoring programmes has been previously described elsewhere (EFSA, 2007, 2008, 2012a), in particular regarding the phenotypic monitoring of the presumptive ESBL‐producing and AmpC β‐lactamase‐producing bacteria in animals and food, and the inclusion of last‐resort antimicrobials in the treatment of certain infections with highly resistant Gram‐negative bacteria in humans, such as the carbapenems and colistin. It is reinforced that isolates are tested for susceptibility and MICs interpreted using the epidemiological cut‐off values and concentration ranges shown in Table 9 to determine the susceptibility of Salmonella spp., and indicator commensal E. coli.
All E. coli isolates deriving from the specific monitoring of ESBL‐/AmpC‐/carbapenemase producing E. coli, as well as those randomly selected isolates of Salmonella spp. and E. coli deriving from the routine monitoring that, after testing with the first panel of antimicrobials are found to be resistant to cefotaxime, ceftazidime or meropenem, should be further tested with a second panel of antimicrobial substances as shown in Table 10. This panel notably includes cefoxitin, cefepime and clavulanate in combination with cefotaxime and ceftazidime for the detection of presumptive ESBL and AmpC producers, as well as imipenem, meropenem and ertapenem to phenotypically identify presumptive carbapenemase producers.
Aerts M., Battisti A., Hendriksen R., Kempf I., Teale C., Tenhagen B., Veldman K., Wasyl D., Guerra B., Liébana E., Thomas‐López D, & Belœil P. (2019). Technical specifications on harmonised monitoring of antimicrobial resistance in zoonotic and indicator bacteria from food‐producing animals and food. EFSA Journal, 17(6), e05709.
Full text: Click here
Publication 2019
AmpC beta-lactamases Animals Bacteria carbapenemase Carbapenems Cefepime Cefotaxime Cefoxitin Ceftazidime Clavulanate Colistin Ertapenem Escherichia coli Food Gram Negative Bacteria Homo sapiens Imipenem Infection Meropenem Microbicides Minimum Inhibitory Concentration Phenotype Salmonella Susceptibility, Disease
5
Automated Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing
Cited 7 times
Disk diffusion testing was done according to the 2011 guidelines of the European Committee of Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) using standard antibiotic disks (i2a, Perols Cedex, France) and Mueller-Hinton agar plates (BD, Franklin Lakes, NJ). All measurements except those for investigator dependence were done by the same experienced laboratory technician to eliminate inter-person bias. In parallel, the disk diffusion Mueller-Hinton agar plates were measured with the Sirscan instrument (i2a, Perols Cedex, France) and manually using a standard calliper. Sirscan measurements were checked and corrected on-screen by the laboratory technician as recommended by the manufacturer. Standard deviations of zone diameter measurements were calculated from 19 independent and blinded readings by 19 experienced persons using antibiotic disk diffusion inhibition zones of S. aureus ATCC 29213, E. coli ATCC 25922, and P. aeruginosa ATCC 27853 (EUCAST quality control strains). Discrepancies of manual and Sirscan readings were categorised as follows: Discrepancies resulting in erratic assignment of bacterial isolates to adjacent interpretative categories (susceptible to intermediate, intermediate to susceptible, intermediate to resistant, resistant to intermediate) were referred to as “minor discrepancies”. Erroneous categorisation of true-susceptible isolates as resistant (considering the manual method as the gold standard) were referred to as “major discrepancies”. Categorisation of true-resistant isolates as susceptible (considering the manual method as the gold standard) were referred to as “very major discrepancies”.
The following parameters were used to test for the presence of individual resistance mechanisms using Sirscan readings: ESBL-screening was done using EUCAST clinical breakpoints for non-susceptibility to cefpodoxime, and/or ceftazidime, and/or cefotaxime, ceftriaxone, and/or cefepime, AmpC and MRSA-screening was done using EUCAST clinical breakpoints for non-susceptibility to cefoxitin, carbapenemase-screening was done using EUCAST clinical breakpoints for non-susceptibility to ertapenem, and/or meropenem, and/or imipenem, and VRE-screening was done using EUCAST clinical breakpoints for non-susceptibility to vancomycin [18 ].
All inhibition zone diameter results were recorded by the Sirweb software (i2a, Perols Cedex, France) and statistical parameters were calculated with the Microsoft Excel 2010 Software (Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA).
Hombach M., Zbinden R, & Böttger E.C. (2013). Standardisation of disk diffusion results for antibiotic susceptibility testing using the sirscan automated zone reader. BMC Microbiology, 13, 225.
Full text: Click here
Publication 2013
Agar Antibiotics Bacteria carbapenemase Cedax Cefepime Cefotaxime Cefoxitin cefpodoxime Ceftazidime Ceftriaxone Diffusion Ertapenem Escherichia coli Europeans Gold Imipenem Laboratory Technicians Meropenem Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Microbicides Pseudomonas aeruginosa Psychological Inhibition Strains Susceptibility, Disease Vancomycin Visually Impaired Persons

Most recents protocols related to «Ertapenem»

1
Carbapenemase-Producing Enterobacterales Verification
Cited 1 time
Since 2009, the NRC has been located in the Department for Medical Microbiology at the Ruhr-University Bochum in Bochum, Germany. For German primary diagnostic laboratories, both clinical and private, it exclusively provides the free service for the verification and genotyping of suspected carbapenemase-producing isolates. These laboratories are requested, but not obliged, to send Enterobacterales isolates that fulfil specific criteria, for E. coli these are: elevated minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC) for ertapenem (> 0.5 mg/L), meropenem or imipenem (> 2 mg/L) or decreased inhibition zone diameters of < 25 mm for ertapenem (10 µg) or < 25 mm for meropenem (10 µg) or imipenem (10 µg), largely following the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) guidelines [23 ]. Along with the sample, diagnostic laboratories are asked to provide basic epidemiological data by filling in a structured submission form in accordance with the German data protection law, including information on the patients’ sex, date of birth, inpatient or outpatient status, geographical location as based on first three numbers of the German five-digit postal code referring to the hospital or surgery where the isolate was sampled, isolate source, infection status and information on prior hospitalisation or stay abroad 6 months before detection.
Details on phenotypic and molecular methods used at the NRC for the identification of carbapenemases are described elsewhere [24 (link)]. In brief, a comprehensive range of phenotypic tests is used to detect Enterobacterales isolates suggestive of being carbapenemase-producing. Individual PCR amplifications of KPC-, VIM-, IMP-, NDM- and OXA-48-encoding genes followed by the sequencing of PCR amplicons are routinely used to confirm and identify the carbapenemase genes.
Hans J.B., Pfennigwerth N., Neumann B., Pfeifer Y., Fischer M.A., Eisfeld J., Schauer J., Haller S., Eckmanns T., Gatermann S, & Werner G. (2023). Molecular surveillance reveals the emergence and dissemination of NDM-5-producing Escherichia coli high-risk clones in Germany, 2013 to 2019. Eurosurveillance, 28(10), 2200509.
Full text: Click here
Publication 2023
carbapenemase Childbirth Diagnosis Ertapenem Escherichia coli Europeans Genes Imipenem Infection Inpatient Meropenem Microbicides Minimum Inhibitory Concentration Operative Surgical Procedures Outpatients Patients Phenotype Psychological Inhibition Susceptibility, Disease Thumb
2
Harmonized AMR Monitoring Protocol
MSs followed Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2020/1729 and recommendations from EFSA regarding the use of epidemiologic cut‐off values for AMR monitoring. MSs tested antimicrobials and interpreted the results using the ECOFFs and concentration ranges shown in Tables F.5 and F.6 to determine the susceptibility of the following microorganisms: Salmonella spp., C. coli, C. jejuni and indicator commensal E. coli. Under the new legislation (Commission Implementing (EU) 2020/1729), changes were made to the ECOFFs and clinical breakpoints for several antimicrobial substances included in the harmonised panel for testing of Salmonella spp., and E. coli. The substances with changes to ECOFFs and or clinical breakpoints included tigecycline, nalidixic acid and ciprofloxacin (Table F.5). For 2021 data from pigs, calves and meat from BCPS, the occurrence of resistance to tigecycline, nalidixic acid and ciprofloxacin is determined using the new ECOFFs and clinical breakpoints, and for 2020 data from poultry, tigecycline, nalidixic acid and ciprofloxacin resistance are analysed using the ECOFFs and clinical breakpoints from the previous legislation (Decision 2013/652/EU). Also, in 2021, a new substance, amikacin, was added to the harmonised panel for both Salmonella spp. and E. coli. While for Campylobacter spp., no changes were made to ECOFFs and clinical breakpoints for the substances included in the harmonised panel. However, two new substances were added (chloramphenicol and ertapenem) and two substances were removed (nalidixic acid and streptomycin).
Presumptive ESBL‐ AmpC‐ or carbapenemase‐producing E. coli isolates identified through selective plating, as well as randomly selected isolates of Salmonella spp. and E. coli that, after testing with the first panel of antimicrobials in accordance with Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2020/1729 were found to be resistant to cefotaxime, ceftazidime or meropenem, should be further tested with a second panel of antimicrobial substances (Table F.7) or further investigated using WGS. The second panel includes cefoxitin, cefepime and clavulanic acid in combination with cefotaxime and ceftazidime for the detection of presumptive ESBL‐ and AmpC‐ producing isolates. Moreover, the second panel contains imipenem, meropenem and ertapenem to phenotypically verify presumptive carbapenemase‐ producers.
The European Union Summary Report on Antimicrobial Resistance in zoonotic and indicator bacteria from humans, animals and food in 2020/2021. (2023). EFSA Journal, 21(3), e07867.
Full text: Click here
Publication 2023
Amikacin Campylobacter carbapenemase Cefepime Cefotaxime Cefoxitin Ceftazidime Chloramphenicol Ciprofloxacin Clavulanic Acid Ertapenem Escherichia coli Fowls, Domestic Imipenem Meat Meropenem Microbicides Nalidixic Acid Pigs Salmonella Scheuermann's Disease Streptomycin Susceptibility, Disease Tigecycline
3
Antimicrobial Resistance Profiling Across Pathogens
For each combination of microorganism, antimicrobial and food category/animal population were tested, MIC distributions were tabulated in frequency tables, giving the number of isolates tested that have a given MIC at each test dilution (mg/L) of the antimicrobial. Isolate‐based dilution results allowed MIC distributions reported:

for Salmonella for amikacin, ampicillin, azithromycin, cefepime, cefotaxime, cefotaxime and clavulanic acid, ceftazidime, ceftazidime and clavulanic acid, cefoxitin, chloramphenicol, ciprofloxacin, colistin, ertapenem, gentamicin, imipenem, meropenem, nalidixic acid, sulfamethoxazole, temocillin, tetracycline, tigecycline and trimethoprim;

for Campylobacter for chloramphenicol, ciprofloxacin, ertapenem, erythromycin, gentamicin, nalidixic acid and tetracycline;

for indicator E. coli for amikacin, ampicillin, azithromycin, cefepime, cefotaxime, cefotaxime and clavulanic acid, ceftazidime, ceftazidime and clavulanic acid, cefoxitin, chloramphenicol, ciprofloxacin, colistin, ertapenem, gentamicin, imipenem, meropenem, nalidixic acid, sulfamethoxazole, temocillin, tetracycline, tigecycline and trimethoprim;

for MRSA for cefoxitin, chloramphenicol, ciprofloxacin, clindamycin, erythromycin, fusidic acid, gentamicin, kanamycin, linezolid, mupirocin, penicillin, quinupristin/dalfopristin, rifampicin, streptomycin, sulfamethoxazole, tetracycline, tiamulin, trimethoprim and vancomycin.

The European Union Summary Report on Antimicrobial Resistance in zoonotic and indicator bacteria from humans, animals and food in 2020/2021. (2023). EFSA Journal, 21(3), e07867.
Full text: Click here
Publication 2023
Amikacin Ampicillin Animal Population Groups Azithromycin Campylobacter Cefepime Cefotaxime Cefoxitin Ceftazidime Chloramphenicol Ciprofloxacin Clavulanic Acid Clindamycin Colistin Ertapenem Erythromycin Escherichia coli Feeds, Animal Food Fusidic Acid Gentamicin Imipenem Kanamycin Linezolid Meropenem Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus MICA protein, human Microbicides Mupirocin Nalidixic Acid Penicillins quinupristin-dalfopristin Rifampin Salmonella Streptomycin Sulfamethoxazole Technique, Dilution temocillin Tetracycline tiamulin Tigecycline Trimethoprim Vancomycin
4
Interpreting Antimicrobial Resistance Trends
ECOFFs, as listed in Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2020/1729, have been used in this report to interpret the isolate based reported MIC data and determine non‐wild‐type organisms also termed ‘microbiologically’ resistant organisms (i.e. displaying a decreased susceptibility), and to ensure that results from different MSs are comparable. From this point onwards in this report, ‘microbiologically’ antimicrobial resistant organisms are referred to as ‘resistant’ for brevity. This report also incorporates re‐evaluation of the historical data accounting for the revised EU legislation, which included the revised ECOFFs. Under the new legislation, the ECOFF used to determine microbiological resistance of Salmonella isolates to tigecycline changed from > 1 to > 0.5 mg/L. Therefore, in this report, the occurrence of resistance to tigecycline for 2021 data (i.e. pigs and calves) is determined using the new ECOFF (MIC > 0.5 mg/L), and for 2020 poultry and carcase data, tigecycline resistance is analysed using the old ECOFF (i.e. MIC > 1 mg/L). To note for tigecycline testing is the instability of the substance in aged (> 12 hours old) Mueller‐Hinton broth medium used in MIC‐testing, which may result in elevated MIC values for some isolates (Bradford et al., 2005 (link)). The reported instability of tigecycline during testing, coupled with the lower ECOFF, may result in elevated reporting of resistance to tigecycline in Salmonella and E. coli isolates with MICs within one dilution range of the ECOFF.
Starting in 2021, new legislative requirements listed in Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2020/1729, require MSs to test target bacterial isolates for new substances. For Salmonella spp., and E. coli, the new substance to be tested is amikacin. For Campylobacter spp., the new substances are chloramphenicol and ertapenem. Nalidixic acid and streptomycin were removed from the harmonised panel for Campylobacter spp.
The occurrence of resistance to a number of antimicrobials was determined for Salmonella, Campylobacter and indicator commensal E. coli isolates and are tabulated at the production‐type level in this report. The occurrence of resistance (i.e. resistance levels) in reporting MS groups was calculated as totals (the total number of resistant isolates out of the total number of tested isolates across reporting MSs) and in the E. coli chapter, also as weighted means to account for the animal population sizes. Data description Throughout the report, level or occurrence of AMR means the percentage of resistant isolates as a proportion of the isolates tested of that microorganism. MSs reporting group means the MSs that provided data and were included in the relevant table of antimicrobial resistance for that bacterium– food or animal category–antimicrobial combination. Terms used to describe the levels or occurrence of antimicrobial resistance are ‘rare’: < 0.1%, ‘very low’: 0.1%–1.0%, ‘low’: > 1%–10.0%, ‘moderate’: > 10.0%–20.0%, ‘high’: > 20.0%–50.0%, ‘very high’: > 50.0%–70.0%, ‘extremely high’: > 70.0%. Although these terms are applied to all antimicrobials, the significance of a given level of resistance depends on the particular antimicrobial and its importance in human and veterinary medicine.
The European Union Summary Report on Antimicrobial Resistance in zoonotic and indicator bacteria from humans, animals and food in 2020/2021. (2023). EFSA Journal, 21(3), e07867.
Full text: Click here
Publication 2023
Amikacin Animal Population Groups Animals Bacteria Campylobacter Chloramphenicol Ertapenem Escherichia coli Food Fowls, Domestic Homo sapiens Microbicides Minimum Inhibitory Concentration Nalidixic Acid Pigs Salmonella Scheuermann's Disease Streptomycin Susceptibility, Disease Technique, Dilution Tigecycline
5
Antimicrobial Resistance Profiles During COVID-19
The antimicrobial resistance profiles were provided by Phoenix BD automated system (Becton Dickinson Franklin Lakes, NJ, EUA); according to manufacturing protocols, each panel was standardized for Gram-positive and Gram-negative AST profiles comprehending the list below:
Aminoglycoside: Amikacin (AMK), Gentamicin (GEN), Synergism Gentamicin (SGEN), Synergism Streptomycin (SSTP), Tobramycin (TOB); Cephalosporins: Cefepime (FEP), Cefoxitin (FOX), Ceftaroline (CPT), Ceftazidime (CAZ), Ceftazidime + Avibactam (CZA), Ceftriaxone (CRO), Cefuroxime (CXM), Cefazolin (CZ); Quinolones: Ciprofloxacin (CIP), Norfloxacin (NX), Levofloxacin (LVX); Penicillin: Amoxicillin/Clavulanic acid (AMC), Ampicillin (AMP), Ampicillin/Sulbactam (SAM), Oxacillin (OXA), Penicillin (PEN), Piperacillin/Tazobactam (TZP); Carbapenems: Ertapenem (ETP), Imipenem (IPM), Meropenem (MEM); Glycopeptides: Teicoplanin (TEC), Vancomycin (VAN): Macrolide: Erythromycin (ERY), Rifampicin (RIP): Lincosamides: Clindamycin (CLI); Oxazolidinone: Linezolid (LZD); Tetracycline: Tetracycline (TET), Minocycline (MIN); Sulfonamides: Sulfamethoxazole/Trimethoprim (STX); Nitroimidazoles: Nitrofurantoin (NIT); Amphenicol: Chloramphenicol (C); Phosphonate: Fosfomycin (FOS); Glycylcyclines: Tigecycline (TGC); Polypeptide: Colistin (CL); Lipopeptides: Daptomycin (DAP).
The resistance profile was classified as resistant (R), and susceptible (S). Any isolate with resistance to three or more classes of antimicrobial agents was classified as multidrug-resistant (MDR) according to the definition proposed by Magiorakos et al. (2012) (link). Some of the clinical isolates were retrieved at the moment of hospitalization for epidemiological active surveillance and infection control. A total of 256 isolates were included in the study and 196 had the antimicrobial susceptibility test performed (Table 1).
Data for new COVID-19 cases for each month were obtained from the Brazilian Ministry of Health (MS) and the State Health Department of Rio de Janeiro, compiled by Cota (2020) .
The prevalence of bacteria species in pediatric, neonatal-ICU, and gynecology/obstetrics wards during the pandemic period was evaluated. In order to compare these three wards with other hospital wards, a total of 2,551 bacteria isolates were recovered from the HICC-HUAP.
Pinheiro F.R., Rozza-de-Menezes R.E., Blum M.C., Pereira R.F., Rocha J.A., Guedes Pinto M.C., Penna B.A., Riley L.W, & Aguiar-Alves F. (2023). Evaluation of changes in antimicrobial susceptibility in bacteria infecting children and their mothers in pediatric, neonatal-intensive care unit, and gynecology/obstetrics wards of a quaternary referral hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic. Frontiers in Microbiology, 14, 1096223.
Full text: Click here
Publication 2023
Amikacin Aminoglycosides Amox clav Amphenicol Ampicillin ampicillin-sulbactam avibactam - ceftazidime Bacteria Carbapenems Cefazolin Cefepime Cefoxitin ceftaroline Ceftazidime Ceftriaxone Cefuroxime Cephalosporins Chloramphenicol Ciprofloxacin Clindamycin Colistin COVID 19 Daptomycin Ertapenem Erythromycin Fosfomycin Gentamicin Glycopeptides glycylcycline Hospitalization Imipenem Infant, Newborn Infection Control Levofloxacin Lincosamides Linezolid Lipopeptides Macrolides Meropenem Microbicides Minocycline Nitrofurantoin Nitroimidazoles Norfloxacin Oxacillin Oxazolidinones Pandemics Penicillins Phosphonates Piperacillin-Tazobactam Combination Product Polypeptides Quinolones Rifampin Streptomycin Sulfonamides Susceptibility, Disease Teicoplanin Tetracycline Tigecycline Tobramycin Trimethoprim-Sulfamethoxazole Combination Vancomycin

Top products related to «Ertapenem»

1
Etest by bioMérieux
Sourced in France, Sweden, United States, Germany, United Kingdom, Denmark, Italy, Australia, Spain, Switzerland, Japan
Etest is a quantitative antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) method developed by bioMérieux. It provides minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) values for specific antimicrobial agents. Etest utilizes a predefined antimicrobial gradient on a plastic strip to determine the MIC of a tested microorganism.
2
Vitek 2 system by bioMérieux
Sourced in France, United States, Germany, Italy, Macao, United Kingdom, Sweden, Belgium, India, Japan, Brazil
The Vitek 2 system is an automated microbiology platform designed for the rapid identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing of microorganisms. The system utilizes miniaturized biochemical testing to provide accurate results for a wide range of bacterial and yeast species.
3
Vitek 2 by bioMérieux
Sourced in France, United States, Germany, Italy, United Kingdom, Canada, Poland, Macao
The Vitek 2 is a compact automated microbiology system designed for the identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing of clinically significant bacteria and yeasts. The system utilizes advanced colorimetric technology to enable rapid and accurate results for clinical decision-making.
4
Vitek 2 compact system by bioMérieux
Sourced in France, United States, Germany, Poland, Macao
The VITEK 2 Compact system is a compact automated microbiology instrument used for the identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing of microorganisms. It is designed to perform rapid and accurate analysis of clinical samples in a laboratory setting.
5
Ertapenem by Merck Group
Sourced in United States, Germany, United Kingdom, Spain, India, China
Ertapenem is a broad-spectrum carbapenem antibiotic developed by Merck Group for the treatment of various bacterial infections. It functions as an inhibitor of cell wall synthesis in susceptible bacteria.
6
Ertapenem by Thermo Fisher Scientific
Sourced in United Kingdom
Ertapenem is a broad-spectrum antibiotic used in the treatment of various bacterial infections. It belongs to the class of carbapenems and functions by inhibiting bacterial cell wall synthesis, leading to bacterial cell lysis and death. Ertapenem demonstrates activity against both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria.
7
Vitek ms by bioMérieux
Sourced in France, United States, Germany, China, Spain, Macao
The VITEK MS is a laboratory instrument developed by bioMérieux for the rapid identification of microorganisms. It utilizes mass spectrometry technology to analyze the unique protein profiles of microbial samples, allowing for accurate and efficient identification of a wide range of bacterial and fungal species.
8
Etest strips by bioMérieux
Sourced in France, United States, United Kingdom, Sweden, Spain
Etest strips are quantitative antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) products developed by bioMérieux. They provide a simple, standardized method for determining the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of antimicrobial agents against a wide range of clinically relevant microorganisms.
9
Meropenem by Thermo Fisher Scientific
Sourced in United Kingdom, United States
Meropenem is a broad-spectrum antibiotic used in laboratory settings for research and testing purposes. It belongs to the carbapenem class of antibiotics and is effective against a wide range of Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria. Meropenem works by inhibiting cell wall synthesis, leading to bacterial cell death.
10
Imipenem by Merck Group
Sourced in United States, Germany, France, China, Sao Tome and Principe, United Kingdom, Italy, India, Spain, Brazil, Canada
Imipenem is a broad-spectrum antibiotic medication used to treat various bacterial infections. It is a member of the carbapenem class of antibiotics and functions by inhibiting bacterial cell wall synthesis, leading to cell death.

More about "Ertapenem"

Ertapenem is a broad-spectrum carbapenem antibiotic that is effective against a wide range of Gram-positive and Gram-negative aerobic and anaerobic bacteria, including those producing extended-spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBLs).
It is commonly used to treat complex infections where antibiotic resistance is a concern.
Ertapenem is typically administered intravenously or intramuscularly and is metabolized in the liver.
The Etest and VITEK 2 system are two commonly used methods for susceptibility testing of Ertapenem and other antibiotics.
The Etest provides a quantitative measurement of antimicrobial susceptibility, while the VITEK 2 system is an automated platform that can identify microorganisms and determine their antibiotic susceptibility profiles.
Researchers can use PubCompare.ai to optimize their Ertapenem studies by locating the best protocols from literature, preprints, and patents, and leveraging AI-driven comparisons to enhance reproducibility and accuracy in their research.
This can be particularly helpful when dealing with complex infections involving resistant bacteria, where it's crucial to identify the most effective treatment options.
In addition to Ertapenem, other carbapenems like Meropenem and Imipenem are also important treatment options for serious bacterial infections.
The VITEK MS, a mass spectrometry-based system, can be used to identify a wide range of microorganisms, including those responsible for such infections.
By utilizing the insights and tools available, researchers can optimize their Ertapenem studies and enhance the quality and reproducibility of their research, ultimately leading to better treatment outcomes for patients facing challenging bacterial infections.