Skip Navigation


JAC Advance Access originally published online on March 13, 2006
Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 2006 57(5):908-913; doi:10.1093/jac/dkl080
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
57/5/908    most recent
dkl080v1
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 (1)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vandenberg, O.
Right arrow Articles by Dediste, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Vandenberg, O.
Right arrow Articles by Dediste, A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Antimicrobial susceptibility of clinical isolates of non-jejuni/coli campylobacters and arcobacters from Belgium

Olivier Vandenberg1,–3,*, Kurt Houf4, Nicole Douat5, Linda Vlaes3, Patricia Retore3, Jean-Paul Butzler6 and Anne Dediste3

1 National Reference Centre for Enteric Campylobacter, Saint-Pierre University Hospital, Brussels, Belgium; 2 Infectious Diseases Epidemiological Unit, Public Health School, Free University of Brussels, Brussels, Belgium; 3 Department of Microbiology, Saint-Pierre University Hospital, Brussels, Belgium; 4 Department of Veterinary Public Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium; 5 Department of Microbiology, Brugmann University Hospital, Brussels, Belgium; 6 Department of Human Ecology, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium

Received 20 November 2005; returned 20 December 2005; revised 29 January 2006; accepted 20 February 2006

* Correspondence address. Department of Microbiology, Saint-Pierre University Hospital, Rue Haute 322, B-1000 Brussels, Belgium. Tel: +32-2-535-4530; Fax: +32-2-535-4656; E-mail: olivier_vandenberg{at}stpierre-bru.be

Objectives: To determine the susceptibility of non-jejuni/coli campylobacters and arcobacters isolated from diarrhoeal stool specimens in Belgium.

Methods: The MICs were determined using Etest for six antimicrobial agents including ampicillin, erythromycin, nalidixic acid, ciprofloxacin, gentamicin and tetracycline for the most frequently isolated non-jejuni/coli campylobacter and arcobacter strains in two University Hospital laboratories between 1995 and 2005.

Results: In total, 85 Campylobacter upsaliensis, 20 Campylobacter concisus, 11 Campylobacter fetus, 61 Arcobacter butzleri and 10 Arcobacter cryaerophilus isolates were tested. Most C. upsaliensis strains were susceptible to ampicillin (100%), gentamicin (100%), ciprofloxacin (94.1%) and tetracycline (100%), whereas 11.8 and 12.9% were resistant to nalidixic acid and erythromycin, respectively. For A. butzleri, 78.7% of isolates were susceptible to ampicillin and erythromycin. Most A. butzleri isolates were susceptible to ciprofloxacin (96.7%), nalidixic acid (82.0%), gentamicin (100%) and tetracycline (100%). All C. concisus strains were fully susceptible to ampicillin and tetracycline, but 5% of them were resistant to gentamicin, ciprofloxacin and erythromycin. Nearly all C. fetus and A. cryaerophilus strains were susceptible to erythromycin but the results should be interpreted with caution since only a small number of strains were tested.

Conclusions: Fluoroquinolones should be considered in the treatment of severe C. upsaliensis and A. butzleri infection. When clinically indicated, erythromycin remains the first choice for the treatment of intestinal campylobacteriosis caused by C. concisus and C. fetus.

Keywords: diarrhoea , resistance , Etest , Campylobacter upsaliensis , Campylobacter concisus


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




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.