Image_2_Is Penicillin Plus Gentamicin Synergistic Against Sessile Group B Streptococcal Isolates? An in Vivo Study With an Experimental Model of Foreign-Body Infection.TIF
The rate of invasive group B Streptococcus (GBS) infections is steadily increasing, particularly in older persons and in adults with diabetes and other comorbidities. This population includes persons with a foreign body (e.g., who have undergone arthroplasty). In a rat tissue cage model, we evaluated the efficacy of adjunctive gentamicin (GEN) administered systemically (5 mg/kg body weight) every 24 h, or locally (12.5 mg/L tissue cage concentration) every 24 or 72 h, in combination with penicillin (PEN) administered systemically (250,000 IU/kg body weight three times per day). The efficacy was evaluated on two different sessile forms of GBS: transition (i.e., in between planktonic and biofilm) and biofilm. After 3 days of treatment, the mean bacterial load reduction of transition-form GBS was greater in all PEN–GEN combination groups than in the PEN monotherapy group (P ≤ 0.03). The 6-day regimen decreased the bacterial load significantly in comparison to the 3-day regimen, irrespective of growth form and adjunctive GEN (P < 0.01). After 6 days of treatment, the mean reduction in transition-form GBS was greater with PEN plus GEN administered locally every 24 h than with PEN monotherapy (P = 0.03). These results were not confirmed with biofilm GBS. The difference in mean bacterial load reduction between all PEN–GEN and PEN monotherapy groups was <100 CFU/mL. Hence, synergy criteria were not fulfilled. Adjunctive systemic GEN consists of potential side effects and showed poor efficacy in this study. Combining systemic PEN and local GEN has a potential application in the treatment of streptococcal implant-associated infections.
History
References
- https://doi.org//10.1128/AAC.19.5.716
- https://doi.org//10.3109/23744235.2015.1131330
- https://doi.org//10.1093/jac/dkl489
- https://doi.org//10.1128/AAC.15.3.484
- https://doi.org//10.1128/AAC.12.4.548
- https://doi.org//10.1128/AAC.11.5.817
- https://doi.org//10.1201/b13787-4
- https://doi.org//10.1097/00003086-199804000-00027
- https://doi.org//10.1093/infdis/155.6.1233
- https://doi.org//10.1128/AAC.28.1.51
- https://doi.org//10.1128/AAC.00523-06
- https://doi.org//10.1002/art.1780140112
- https://doi.org//10.1080/23744235.2016.1244612
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.jgar.2017.07.005
- https://doi.org//10.3389/fmicb.2016.01680
- https://doi.org//10.1016/S0022-3476(76)80446-5
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s15010-007-7251-0
- https://doi.org//10.1086/599369
- https://doi.org//10.1172/JCI112463
- https://doi.org//10.1080/00365540701534517
- https://doi.org//10.1056/NEJMra040181
- https://doi.org//10.1093/infdis/146.4.487