Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (17)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sloos, J. H.
Right arrow Articles by van Boven, C. P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Sloos, J. H.
Right arrow Articles by van Boven, C. P.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, Vol 42, 787-791, Copyright © 1998 by The British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy


Changing susceptibilities of coagulase-negative staphylococci to teicoplanin in a teaching hospital [In Process Citation]

JH Sloos, JA van de Klundert, L Dijkshoorn and CP van Boven
Department of Medical Microbiology, Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands.

The susceptibility of two collections of coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS) isolated from clinical specimens for teicoplanin and vancomycin were compared. They comprised 91 and 101 isolates, collected in 1985 and 1994 respectively, from different departments of a teaching hospital. MICs of vancomycin and teicoplanin were determined by a modified Etest method. Additionally, a disc diffusion test was performed for teicoplanin. All isolates were susceptible to vancomycin (MIC < or = 4 mg/L). Two of the 91 isolates collected in 1985 were intermediate to teicoplanin (MIC between 8 and 32 mg/L), whereas in 1994 the number of intermediate isolates was 20 out of 101 (P < 0.01). The correlation between MICs, as determined by the modified Etest assay, and disc diffusion zones was poor (r = -0.35). Results show that resistance to teicoplanin in CNS has increased in the study hospital over a period of 9 years. This increase is likely to be correlated with the introduction of teicoplanin. Furthermore, a disc diffusion method does not appear to be the first method of choice for detection of strains of CNS with diminished susceptibility to teicoplanin.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J Antimicrob ChemotherHome page
A. P. R. Wilson, J. A. Cepeda, S. Hayman, T. Whitehouse, M. Singer, and G. Bellingan
In vitro susceptibility of Gram-positive pathogens to linezolid and teicoplanin and effect on outcome in critically ill patients
J. Antimicrob. Chemother., August 1, 2006; 58(2): 470 - 473.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Med MicrobiolHome page
A. Shittu, J. Lin, D. Morrison, and D. Kolawole
Isolation and molecular characterization of multiresistant Staphylococcus sciuri and Staphylococcus haemolyticus associated with skin and soft-tissue infections
J. Med. Microbiol., January 1, 2004; 53(1): 51 - 55.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Antimicrob ChemotherHome page
A. Tsakris, E. Papadimitriou, J. Douboyas, and A. Antoniadis
Emergence of teicoplanin-resistant Staphylococcus haemolyticus clinical isolates in Greece
J. Antimicrob. Chemother., December 1, 2000; 46(6): 1040 - 1041.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Antimicrob ChemotherHome page
J. H. Sloos, L. Dijkshoorn, and C. P. A. van Boven
Septicaemias caused by a strain of Staphylococcus haemolyticus exhibiting intermediate susceptibility to teicoplanin in multiple intensive care unit patients
J. Antimicrob. Chemother., March 1, 2000; 45(3): 410 - 411.
[Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.