Curr Ther Res Clin Exp. 2007 Jan;68(1):49-66. doi: 10.1016/j.curtheres.2007.03.001.
A review of the current place of glycopeptides in turkish medical practice.
Current therapeutic research, clinical and experimental
Hakan Erdem, Oral Oncul
Affiliations
Affiliations
- Department of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology, Gulhane Medical Academy, Ankara, Turkey.
- Department of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology, Gulhane Haydarpasa Training Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
PMID: 24678118
PMCID: PMC3965998 DOI: 10.1016/j.curtheres.2007.03.001
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Glycopeptide antibiotics are considered by many investigators to be the last resort in the treatment of gram-positive bacterial infections.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this review was to assess the place of glycopeptides in the treatment of common gram-positive bacteria in accordance with the current epidemiologic data in Turkey.
METHODS: A search of both the English- and Turkish-language literature indexed on MEDLINE, Ulakbim (Turkey), and Pleksus (Turkey) was performed using the terms: vancomycin, teicoplanin, and glycopeptides, or their Turkish-language counterparts. The complete texts of the articles found in these databases were obtained from the electronic library of Gulhane Medical Academy, Ankara, Turkey. Articles from regional journals, without the support of an electronic format, were obtained by direct communication. Articles of interest were those based on studies occurring in Turkish populations, with special consideration given to publications in press after 2002.
RESULTS: Staphylococci were the most frequent gram-positive pathogens encountered in Turkish hospitals. Studies have found that ∼74% of strains were Staphylococcus aureus and the remaining strains were coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS). Overall methicillin resistance in staphylococci was reported as ∼60%. In Turkey, S aureus was one of the most common infectious agents found inside hospitals and is deemed a growing threat in the community. While the rate of methicillin resistance in community-acquired isolates is ∼4%, the data from hospitals suggest that reduced resistance comprises most of the isolates. In the studies reviewed, older quinolones like ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin seem to be ineffective in nearly half of the S aureus isolates. Alternatives like rifampicin, gentamicin, tetracycline, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (TMP/SMX), clindamycin, and erythromycin have had substantial resistance profiles in >50% of the strains. In recent Turkish studies, in vitro profiles of linezolid, quinupristin/dalfopristin (QD), and daptomycin have had positive results. As in the S aureus isolates, resistance trends have been observed in the CoNS group of pathogens. The possible use of β-lactams seems restricted, and alternative approaches have become necessary. Quinolones, gentamicin, tetracycline, TMP/SMX, clindamycin, and erythromycin have resistance profiles of >50%. Although glycopeptide resistance was not detected, the frequency of heterogenous vancomycin-intermediate S aureus, a precursor to future resistance, was 13% in 1 study. Current studies in Turkey have found that Enterococcus faecalis comprises three quarters of enterococci while the rest are comprised of Enterococcus faecium. Initial studies performed with linezolid, QD, and daptomycin suggest that these drugs might be effective alternatives for future enterococcal infections that may have high glycopeptide resistance. Approximately 8% of the Streptococcus pneumoniae strains had high-level resistance in Turkey. However, 10 million units of crystallized penicillin or 3 g of oral amoxicillin maintains the optimum treatment of pneumococcal infections outside the central nervous system (CNS). Resistance profiles in third-generation cephalosporins in Turkey range between 2% and 2.5%.
CONCLUSIONS: In Turkey, a review of the existing literature found that the current use of glycopeptides in pneumococcal infections is restricted to CNS infections facing therapeutic failure in due course. However, the belief that these drugs are the last resort, either in staphylococcal or enterococcal infections, is no longer valid. If a patient has a critical status due to probable gram-positive microorganisms, clinicians should consider the empiric use of glycopeptides. However, new molecules such as linezolid, QD, and daptomycin, offered for use in the treatment of gram-positive bacterial diseases, should be reserved for the future, when glycopeptides eventually become obsolete.
Keywords: Turkey; glycopeptides
References
- Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1989 Sep;33(9):1588-91 - PubMed
- Am J Med. 1991 Sep 16;91(3B):72S-75S - PubMed
- Lancet Infect Dis. 2002 Nov;2(11):677-85 - PubMed
- Emerg Infect Dis. 2005 Sep;11(9):1491-2 - PubMed
- Annu Rev Microbiol. 1988;42:441-64 - PubMed
- N Engl J Med. 1996 Nov 7;335(19):1445-53 - PubMed
- Lancet. 1968 Oct 5;2(7571):741-4 - PubMed
- Clin Microbiol Rev. 2000 Oct;13(4):513-22 - PubMed
- Clin Microbiol Rev. 2000 Oct;13(4):686-707 - PubMed
- Am J Med. 2003 Jun 15;114(9):723-8 - PubMed
- Microbes Infect. 2002 Feb;4(2):215-24 - PubMed
- BMC Infect Dis. 2005 May 05;5:31 - PubMed
- Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2005 Dec;26(6):508-10 - PubMed
- N Engl J Med. 2003 Apr 3;348(14):1342-7 - PubMed
- J Clin Microbiol. 2006 Nov;44(11):3883-6 - PubMed
- Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001 Aug 14;98(17):9865-70 - PubMed
- Clin Infect Dis. 1999 Nov;29(5):1171-7 - PubMed
- Lancet. 1977 Nov 12;2(8046):995-7 - PubMed
- East Afr Med J. 2005 Jul;82(7):331-6 - PubMed
- Science. 1993 Jan 8;259(5092):227-30 - PubMed
- Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2006 Feb;25(2):135-7 - PubMed
- Epidemiol Infect. 2002 Oct;129(2):421-4 - PubMed
- Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2000 Aug;21(8):520-4 - PubMed
- Clin Microbiol Rev. 1988 Jul;1(3):281-99 - PubMed
- Clin Infect Dis. 2003 Dec 1;37(11):1405-33 - PubMed
- Ann Intern Med. 1992 Sep 1;117(5):390-8 - PubMed
- Med Sci Monit. 2006 Feb;12(2):CR81-5 - PubMed
- Clin Infect Dis. 2001 Oct 1;33(7):990-6 - PubMed
- J Antimicrob Chemother. 2007 Mar;59(3):478-86 - PubMed
- Clin Ther. 2005 Jun;27(6):674-83 - PubMed
- Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1992 Aug;36(8):1766-9 - PubMed
- Clin Infect Dis. 2001 Sep 1;33 Suppl 2:S94-106 - PubMed
- Trends Microbiol. 1994 Oct;2(10):343-7 - PubMed
- N Engl J Med. 1998 Aug 20;339(8):520-32 - PubMed
- Nat Prod Rep. 2002 Feb;19(1):100-7 - PubMed
- J Chemother. 2005 Feb;17(1):25-30 - PubMed
- Acta Microbiol Pol. 2003;52(2):143-8 - PubMed
- Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2005 Jun;25(6):535-8 - PubMed
- J Bacteriol. 1984 May;158(2):513-6 - PubMed
- Clin Microbiol Rev. 1997 Oct;10(4):781-91 - PubMed
- Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2006 Dec;28(6):586 - PubMed
- Expert Opin Investig Drugs. 2006 Apr;15(4):417-29 - PubMed
- Clin Microbiol Infect. 2004 Aug;10(8):718-23 - PubMed
- Microb Drug Resist. 2005 Spring;11(1):48-52 - PubMed
- Mayo Clin Proc. 2006 Apr;81(4):529-36 - PubMed
- Arch Intern Med. 2000 May 22;160(10):1399-408 - PubMed
- Biochem Pharmacol. 2006 Mar 30;71(7):968-80 - PubMed
- Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002 May 28;99(11):7687-92 - PubMed
- Am J Infect Control. 1999 Dec;27(6):520-32 - PubMed
- Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1993 Aug;37(8):1563-71 - PubMed
- J Gen Microbiol. 1988 Jun;134(6):1465-9 - PubMed
- J Antimicrob Chemother. 2005 Sep;56(3):519-23 - PubMed
- Lancet. 1997 Jun 28;349(9069):1901-6 - PubMed
- Clin Microbiol Infect. 2007 Jan;13(1):106-8 - PubMed
- Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1993 Aug;37(8):1630-6 - PubMed
- FEMS Microbiol Lett. 1992 Jun 1;72(2):195-8 - PubMed
- N Engl J Med. 1999 Feb 18;340(7):517-23 - PubMed
- Int J Infect Dis. 2006 May;10(3):262-3 - PubMed
- Lancet. 1997 Dec 6;350(9092):1670-3 - PubMed
- Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2004 May;23(5):510-2 - PubMed
- Curr Med Chem. 2001 Dec;8(14):1759-73 - PubMed
Publication Types