<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" href="https://imcjms.com/public/assets/rss.css" ?><rss version="2.0">
<channel>
    <title>IMC Journal of Medical Science</title>
    <link>https://imcjms.com/public</link>
    <description>Ibrahim Medical College Journal of Medical Science</description>

                        <item>
                <title><![CDATA[Activity of Mecillinam and Clavulanic Acid on ESBL Producing and  Non- ESBL Producing Escherichia Coli Isolated From UTI Cases]]></title>

                                    <author><![CDATA[Khandaker Shadia]]></author>
                                    <author><![CDATA[Abdullah Akhtar Ahmed]]></author>
                                    <author><![CDATA[Lovely Barai]]></author>
                                    <author><![CDATA[Fahmida Rahman]]></author>
                                    <author><![CDATA[Nusrat Tahmina]]></author>
                                    <author><![CDATA[J. Ashraful Haq]]></author>
                
                <link data-url="https://imcjms.com/public/registration/journal_full_text/250">
    https://imcjms.com/public/registration/journal_full_text/250
</link>
                <pubDate>Mon, 10 Jul 2017 11:15:31 +0000</pubDate>
                <category><![CDATA[Original Article]]></category>
                <comments><![CDATA[Ibrahim Med. Coll. J. 2014; 8(2): 56-60]]></comments>
                <description>Mecillinam is one of the very few oral
antibacterial agents used against extended spectrum b-lactamase (ESBL) producing Escherichia coli (E. coli) causing
urinary tract infection (UTI)). It is reported that, resistance to mecillinam
can be reversed to some extent by adding beta lactamase inhibitor like
clavulanic acid. The present study was aimed to determine in-vitro
activity of mecillinam and mecillinam-clavulanic acid combination on the
susceptibility of ESBL producing and non-ESBL producing E. coli. Total
124 E. coli (78 ESBL positive and 46 ESBL negative) isolates from urine
samples of patients with UTI were included in the study. Organisms were
isolated from patients attending BIRDEM General Hospital from July 2012 to
December 2012. ESBL production was tested by double disc synergy test. Minimum
inhibitory concentration (MIC) of mecillinam and clavulanic acid against E.
coli was determined by agar dilution method. Of the total E. coli
isolates, 62.9% was ESBL positive and 37.1% was negative for ESBL. Out of ESBL
positive isolates, 75.6% was sensitive to mecillinam while ESBL negative
isolates showed the sensitivity as 67.4%. The sensitivity to mecillinam of ESBL
positive and negative isolates increased to 85.9% and 86.9% respectively by
addition of clavulanic acid with mecillinam. The MIC values of intermediate and
resistant isolates converted to sensitive MIC range after addition of
clavulanic acid with mecillinam. Conversion of resistance of ESBL producing
isolates by adding clavulanic acid was also evident by the reduction of MIC50&amp;nbsp;and MIC90&amp;nbsp;from 4µg/ml to £1 µg/ml and from 128 µg/ml to 64 µg/ml respectively. Similar trend
of reduction of MICs was also observed in non-ESBLs.
Ibrahim Med. Coll. J. 2014; 8(2): 56-60
Address for Correspondence:Dr. Khandaker Shadia,
Assistant Professor, Department of Microbiology, Ibrahim Medical College, 122
Kazi Nazrul Islam Avenue, Shahbag, Dhaka-1000.
&amp;nbsp;
Escherichia coli (E. coli) remains an important cause of urinary tract infections (UTIs). UTI
by extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL) producing strains of E. coli is difficult
to treat. Concomitant resistance to other non β-lactam
antibiotics like aminoglycosides and fluoroquinolones has further complicated
the situation and left very limited treatment options, especially per oral
regimes.1&amp;nbsp;Mecillinam is an oral amidinopenicillin which
acts by binding with penicillin binding protein-2 (PBP-2). It is relatively
stable to β-lactamase enzymes and reaches very high concentration in urine.2&amp;nbsp;Thus mecillinam
is proven to be a suitable antimicrobial agent against ESBL producing
uropathogens like E. coli and Klebsiella spp. But, chromosomal
mutation and few beta-lactamase induced mechanism results in mecillinam
resistance in clinical isolates.3-5&amp;nbsp;Though mecillinam resistance has been reported
from various part of the world it is less pronounced than other beta-lactams.6,7&amp;nbsp;In vitro studies have shown
that mecillinam resistance conferred by higher inoculum can be reversed by
addition of beta-lactamase inhibitors like clavulanic acid.8&amp;nbsp;Clavulanic acid is a beta
lactam compound that has weak intrinsic antibacterial activity. When used in
combination with other β-lactam drugs it exerts synergistic effect by inhibiting beta
lactamase enzymes.9,10
&amp;nbsp;
Bacterial strains
&amp;nbsp;
Double disc synergy test was employed to
detect ESBL production.12&amp;nbsp;Bacterial
suspension of 0.5 McFarland standard was plated in Muller-Hinton agar with
Amoxycillin-clavulanic acid (30 µg) disc in between and 20 mm apart from
Ceftazidime (30 µg) and Ceftriaxone (30 µg) discs. Expansion of the zone of
inhibition around Ceftriaxone and/or ceftazidime disc towards the amoxycillin-clavulanic
acid disc was considered ESBL production.
Determination of MIC
&amp;nbsp;
Table-1 shows the susceptibility pattern of
ESBL positive and negative E. coli isolates to mecillinam and
mecillinam+clavulanic acid according to MIC values. Mecillinam sensitivity was
demonstrated in 75.6% ESBL positive and 67.4% ESBL negative isolates which was
augmented to 85.9% and 86.9% respectively after addition of clavulanic acid. In
ESBL positive and negative strains 5.2% and 8.7% isolates were intermediately
sensitive to mecillinam, whereas none of the isolates were intermediate
sensitive to mecillinam+ clavulanic acid combination. Resistance to mecillinam
was found in 19.2% and 23.9% ESBL positive and negative isolates that were
reduced to 14.1% and 13.1% after adding clavulanic acid with mecillinam
respectively.
Table-1: Susceptibility
pattern of ESBL positive and ESBL negative E. coli to mecillinam and
mecillinam+ clavulanic acid according to MIC values (N=124)
&amp;nbsp;All the isolates having 16 µg/ml and 32 µg/ml
MIC of mecillinam converted to sensitive after addition of clavulanic acid. Out
of 5 isolates having MIC of 64µg/ml, 2 (40%) were converted to sensitive. But
the isolates having MIC of ³ 128
demonstrated no change in susceptibility. Total 55.9% intermediately sensitive
and resistant E. coli became sensitive to mecillinam by adding
clavulanic acid (Table-2).
Table-2: Change
of susceptibility in relation to MIC values of intermediate sensitive and
resistant isolates after adding clavulanic acid
&amp;nbsp;The MIC of mecillinam against ESBL producing E.
coli ranged from £1-³1024 µg/ml. MIC50&amp;nbsp;and MIC90&amp;nbsp;were 4
and 128 µg/ml respectively. After adding clavulanic acid with mecillinam MIC50&amp;nbsp;and MIC90&amp;nbsp;reduced to £1 µg and 64 µg/ml respectively. In non-ESBL producing E. coli isolates
MIC50&amp;nbsp;and MIC90&amp;nbsp;were 4 and 64
µg/ml respectively with mecillinam and £1and 32 with mecillinam+clavulanic acid (Table-3).
Table-3: Change
of MIC50&amp;nbsp;and MIC90&amp;nbsp;values of ESBL producing and
non-ESBL producing E. coli isolates by addition of clavulinic acid with
mecillinam
&amp;nbsp;
&amp;nbsp;
ESBL producing E. coli is isolated in
very high frequency in nosocomial as well as community acquired urinary tract
infections.8,13-15&amp;nbsp;In the
present study, about 69% inpatient and 57% outpatient E. coli isolates
were found ESBL producer. This proportion of ESBL isolation is similar to those
described in several studies in home and abroad.8,13,14&amp;nbsp;A considerable numbers of
isolates irrespective of ESBL production showed sensitivity to mecillinam. The
high susceptibility rate of ESBL producing E. coli to mecillinam as
determined by MIC method in this study is comparable to the findings of others
who found 94% and 85% sensitivity respectively.13,14&amp;nbsp;But in the context of
Bangladesh, mecillinam sensitivity of E. coli was reported as 43-67% in
2009.14,15&amp;nbsp;This
divergence may be due to the fact that, in those studies uropathogenic E.
coli irrespective of ESBL production was considered and disc diffusion
method was used to determine the sensitivity instead of MIC method.
Mecillinam is one of the very few oral drug
used in treating community acquired urinary tract infection. According to in-vitro
findings, it is stable against beta lactamase enzymes produced by gram negative
as well as gram positive bacteria. Extensive use of mecillinam because of its
effectiveness in UTI has exerted selective pressure resulting in chromosomal
mutation of the drug target and emergence of resistance. Further, few beta
lactamases like type IIIa and IVc have activity against mecillinam causing
hydrolysis of the agent.10&amp;nbsp;These factors together results in mecillinam resistance in clinical
practice. Addition of any compound that has inhibitory effect on these enzymes
may improve the antibacterial activity of mecillinam. In this ground, activity
of mecillinam in combination with a beta lactamase inhibitor, clavulanic acid,
was also evaluated in the study. Using the agar dilution method with standard
inoculum of 1x104&amp;nbsp;cfu/spot, there was a marked decrease in the
MIC of mecillinam when combined with clavulanate. As a result, sensitivity of
ESBLs producing E. coli improved from 75.6% to 85.9% and for non-ESBLs
producers from 67.4% to 86.9%. The MICs of individual isolates markedly reduced
after adding clavulonic acid, but overall range of MICs was not changed
(ranging from £1 - ³1024). Because MICs of some isolates were out of the test range it
was not possible to determine whether there was a significant (³8 fold) decrease in MIC or not. The lowest value of MIC in our
assay was 1 µg/ml; so in those isolates where MIC reduced beyond the
concentration of 1 µg/ml could not be determined. Similar things happened in
some highly resistant isolates having the MIC of &amp;gt;1024 µg/ml which was the
highest MIC value tested. But the additional inhibitory effect of clavulanic
acid could be predicted from the reduction of MIC50&amp;nbsp;and MIC90&amp;nbsp;of mecillinam after adding
clavulonic acid (Table-3). Using the standard inoculum 1x104&amp;nbsp;cfu/spot, MIC50&amp;nbsp;of mecillinam was reduced
from 4 µg/ml to £1 µg/ml and MIC90&amp;nbsp;from 128 µg/ml to 64 µg/ml.
These findings were in accordance with previous studies.8,17&amp;nbsp;In the present study similar
trend of reduction of MICs was also observed among ESBL negative E. coli.
The observed synergistic effect of mecillinam-clavulanic acid combination on
ESBL negative isolates could be due to the presence of other broad spectrum β-lactamases which were inhibitable by clavulanic acid or due to the
primary affinity of clavulanic acid for PBP-2 of E. coli like
mecillinam.18,9&amp;nbsp;Altogether,
by adding clavulonic acid with mecillinam about 56% of resistant isolates
became sensitive which were resistant or intermediately sensitive with
mecillinam alone (Table-2). In the present study, we have further observed that
all intermediate and resistant isolates having MIC of 16 µg/ml and 32 µg/ml
became sensitive (MIC £1-8) when
clavulanic acid was added with mecillinam. But, only 40% isolates having MIC of
64 µg/ml reverted to sensitive range and none of the isolates having MIC ³128 µg/ml became sensitive by adding clavulanic acid. It suggests
that there is chance of treatment response with mecillinam-clavulanic acid
combination in infection with resistant E. coli having such range of
MICs. However, this combination may not be useful in severe infection by ESBL
producers due to the inoculum effect of the offending organism on the drugs.7,8,19&amp;nbsp;
&amp;nbsp;
This study was funded by the Research Grant of
Ibrahim Medical College. We thank General Pharmaceutical Ltd, Bangladesh and
Incepta Pharmaceutical Ltd, Bangladesh for kindly providing the pivmecillinam
and potassium clavulanate. 
References
2.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Sougakoff W and Jarlier V. Comparative
potency of mecillinam and other beta-lactam antibiotics against Escherichia
coli strains producing different beta-lactamases. J Antimicrob Chemother
2000; 46(Suppl 1): 9–14.
4.&amp;nbsp; Abhilash KP, Veeraraghavan B
and Abraham OC. Epidemiology and outcome of bacteremia caused by extended
spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella
spp. in a tertiary care teaching hospital in south India. J Assoc
Physicians India 2010; 58: 13-7.
6.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Kahlmeter G, Poulsen HO. Antimicrobial
susceptibility of Escherichia coli from community-acquired urinary tract
infections in Europe: the ECO.SENS study revisited. Int J Antimicrob Agents
2012; 39: 45–51.
8.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Lampri N, Galani I, Poulakou G et al.
Mecillinam/clavulanate combination: a possible option for the treatment of
community-acquired uncomplicated urinary tract infections caused by extended
spectrum β-lactamase producing Escherichia coli. J Antimicrob
Chemother 2012; 1-5.
10.&amp;nbsp; Bongaerts GPA and Bruggeman-ogle KM. Effect of
Beta-Lactamase and salt on mecillinam Susceptibility of Enterobacterial
strains. Antimicrob agents and chemotherapy 1980; 18(5): 680-86.
12.&amp;nbsp; Jarlier V, Nicolas MH, Fournier G and
Philippon A. Extended spectrum beta lactamases conferring transferable
resistance to newer beta lactam agents in Enterobacteriaceae- Hospital
prevalence and susceptibility patterns. Rev Infect Dis 1988; 10:
867-78.
14.&amp;nbsp; Saleh AA, Ahmed SS, Ahmed M et al. Changing
trends in Uropathogens and their Antimicrobial sensitivity pattern. Bangladesh
J Med Microbiol 2009; 3(1): 9-12.
16.&amp;nbsp; Auer S, Wojna A and Hell M. ESBL producing Escherichia
coli in uncomplicated urinary tract infections – oral treatment options? 49th&amp;nbsp;ICCAC, San Fransisco CA.
2009
18.&amp;nbsp; Goldstein EJ, Citron DM and Cherubin CE. Comparison
of the inoculum effects of members of the family Enterobacteriaceae on
cefoxitin and other cephalosporins, β-lactamase
inhibitor combinations, and the penicillin-derived component of these
combinations. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1991; 35: 560-66.
</description>

            </item>
            
    <copyright>2026 Ibrahim Medical College. All rights reserved.</copyright>
</channel>
</rss>
