Ceftaroline + Rifampin Versus Vancomycin + Rifampin in the Treatment of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Meningitis in an Experimental Rabbit Model.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q4 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Damla Akdag, Tuncer Turhan, Elif Bolat, Gamze Sanlıdag-Isbilen, Canberk Tomruk, Furkan Isbilen, Yigit Uyanikgil, Sohret Aydemir, Tansu Yamazhan, Husnu Pullukcu, Bilgin Arda, Meltem Tasbakan, Berke Gokkilic, Ekin Kartal, Dilsah Baskol Elik, Hilal Sipahi, Sercan Ulusoy, Oguz Resat Sipahi
{"title":"Ceftaroline + Rifampin Versus Vancomycin + Rifampin in the Treatment of Methicillin-Resistant <i>Staphylococcus aureus</i> Meningitis in an Experimental Rabbit Model.","authors":"Damla Akdag, Tuncer Turhan, Elif Bolat, Gamze Sanlıdag-Isbilen, Canberk Tomruk, Furkan Isbilen, Yigit Uyanikgil, Sohret Aydemir, Tansu Yamazhan, Husnu Pullukcu, Bilgin Arda, Meltem Tasbakan, Berke Gokkilic, Ekin Kartal, Dilsah Baskol Elik, Hilal Sipahi, Sercan Ulusoy, Oguz Resat Sipahi","doi":"10.1089/sur.2024.069","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Background/Aim:</i></b> To compare the effectiveness ceftaroline-rifampicin (CR) and vancomycin-rifampicin (VR), against methicillin-resistant <i>Staphylococcus aureus</i> (MRSA) in a rabbit meningitis model, to compare the effects on brain tissues in terms of inflammation and apoptosis and to test the antibiotics via in vitro time-kill and synergy tests. <b><i>Method:</i></b> Meningitis was induced using MRSA strain ATCC 43300. After 28 hours, the rabbits were split into three groups: control, VR, and CR. A CSF culture was taken at the start (<i>T</i><sub>0</sub>) and end of treatment (EOT)-the 24th hour of treatment. At EOT, the animals' brain tissues were examined for inflammation and apoptosis. The study strain was tested for a 24-hour time kill assay. <b><i>Results:</i></b> At the EOT, statistically significant differences were observed between the treatment groups in terms of reducing the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) bacterial count, achieving partial or complete treatment response, and exhibiting lower levels of neuronal apoptosis compared with the control group. However, there was no significant difference in all three parameters and in survival between the two treatment groups. The CR group exhibited a noticeable decrease in inflammation than the control group, but no significant difference was found between the control group versus VR and VR versus CR group. Rifampicin did not improve antibacterial efficacy in the in vitro time-kill assay. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> The CR arm showed better complete response and inflammation, but both treatments were similar in other parameters. CR combination was found as effective as VR combination for treating MRSA meningitis.</p>","PeriodicalId":22109,"journal":{"name":"Surgical infections","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical infections","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/sur.2024.069","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/Aim: To compare the effectiveness ceftaroline-rifampicin (CR) and vancomycin-rifampicin (VR), against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in a rabbit meningitis model, to compare the effects on brain tissues in terms of inflammation and apoptosis and to test the antibiotics via in vitro time-kill and synergy tests. Method: Meningitis was induced using MRSA strain ATCC 43300. After 28 hours, the rabbits were split into three groups: control, VR, and CR. A CSF culture was taken at the start (T0) and end of treatment (EOT)-the 24th hour of treatment. At EOT, the animals' brain tissues were examined for inflammation and apoptosis. The study strain was tested for a 24-hour time kill assay. Results: At the EOT, statistically significant differences were observed between the treatment groups in terms of reducing the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) bacterial count, achieving partial or complete treatment response, and exhibiting lower levels of neuronal apoptosis compared with the control group. However, there was no significant difference in all three parameters and in survival between the two treatment groups. The CR group exhibited a noticeable decrease in inflammation than the control group, but no significant difference was found between the control group versus VR and VR versus CR group. Rifampicin did not improve antibacterial efficacy in the in vitro time-kill assay. Conclusion: The CR arm showed better complete response and inflammation, but both treatments were similar in other parameters. CR combination was found as effective as VR combination for treating MRSA meningitis.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Surgical infections
Surgical infections INFECTIOUS DISEASES-SURGERY
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
5.00%
发文量
127
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Surgical Infections provides comprehensive and authoritative information on the biology, prevention, and management of post-operative infections. Original articles cover the latest advancements, new therapeutic management strategies, and translational research that is being applied to improve clinical outcomes and successfully treat post-operative infections. Surgical Infections coverage includes: -Peritonitis and intra-abdominal infections- Surgical site infections- Pneumonia and other nosocomial infections- Cellular and humoral immunity- Biology of the host response- Organ dysfunction syndromes- Antibiotic use- Resistant and opportunistic pathogens- Epidemiology and prevention- The operating room environment- Diagnostic studies
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信