In vitro and in vivo antibacterial activity of tazobactam/piperacillin

We studied the β-lactamase inhibitory activity of tazobactam (TAZ) and the in vitro and in vivo antibacterial activity of tazobactam/piperacillin (TAZ/PIPC). The following results were obtained. 1) TAZ inhibited various β-lactamases more effectively than sulbactam. A progressiv inhibition of TAZ aga...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inCHEMOTHERAPY Vol. 42; no. Supplement2; pp. 164 - 177
Main Authors Minami, Shinzaburo, Yamada, Hisashi, Okamoto, Seiki, Narita, Hirokazu, Maehana, Junko, Horii, Taeko, Myohara, Yuki, Ogake, Naoko, Araki, Harumi, Fujimaki, Kazuo, Matsumura, Naoki, Kitayama, Rieko, Watanabe, Yasuo, Yasuda, Takashi
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Japanese
Published Japanese Society of Chemotherapy 1994
公益社団法人 日本化学療法学会
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN0009-3165
1884-5894
DOI10.11250/chemotherapy1953.42.Supplement2_164

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:We studied the β-lactamase inhibitory activity of tazobactam (TAZ) and the in vitro and in vivo antibacterial activity of tazobactam/piperacillin (TAZ/PIPC). The following results were obtained. 1) TAZ inhibited various β-lactamases more effectively than sulbactam. A progressiv inhibition of TAZ against cephalosporinases was observed. 2) TAZ/PIPC exhibited a broad spectrum of antibacterial activity and potent activity against aerobic and anaerobic bacteria. 3) TAZ enhanced the activity of PIPC against PIPC-resistant bacteria such as Staphylococcus aureus (methicillin-susceptible), Staphylococcus epidermidis (methicillin-susceptible), Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Haemophilus influenzae, Moraxella catarrhalis and Bacteroides fragilis, and TAZ/PIPC was equally or more active than sulbactam/cefoperazone (SBT/CPZ), cefotiam and ceftazidime (CAZ) against P. aeruginosa, H. influenzae, M catarrhalis and B. fragilis resistant to PIPC. 4) The inducer activity of TAZ/PIPC for β-lactamase production was as low as that of PIPC. 5) TAZ/PIPC was more active than PIPC against rat pouch mixed infection caused by E. coli and penicillinase-producing S. epidermidis, rat intrauterine infection and mouse urinary tract infection caused by PIPC-resistant E. coli. TAZ/PIPC was more active than SBT/CPZ against rat pouch infection caused by P. aeruginosa highly resistant to CAZ.
ISSN:0009-3165
1884-5894
DOI:10.11250/chemotherapy1953.42.Supplement2_164