Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Linezolid”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 109 records · Page 6Linked to original sources
PubMed2002

Efficacy and safety of linezolid in the treatment of skin and soft tissue infections.

The vast majority of community-acquired skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) are caused by gram-positive cocci or are polymicrobial in nature. Hospital-acquired SSTIs are caused by gram-positive cocci in more than 50% of patients. Multidrug-resistant gram-positive cocci are rarely associated with community-acquired SSTIs but are frequently found in hospital-acquired SSTIs. Linezolid is the first member of a new class of antibiotics, the oxazolidinones. These antimicrobial agents have a unique mechanism of action and exhibit excellent activity against a variety of gram-positive organisms, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-resistant enterococci. Linezolid is 100% orally absorbed, allowing for easy intravenous-to-oral continuation therapy. There is considerable clinical experience with the use of linezolid in SSTIs in phase II and III clinical trials. In comparative trials, linezolid was as effective as oxacillin-dicloxacillin or flucloxacillin in patients with complicated SSTIs caused by gram-positive organisms. Linezolid was also associated with significantly earlier hospital discharge than comparator agents among patients with SSTIs. It was equally effective as vancomycin in patients with SSTIs caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and has also demonstrated efficacy in patients with SSTIs caused by vancomycin-resistant enterococci. Linezolid is well tolerated: the most common adverse events (gastrointestinal effects, headache) are reported in frequencies similar to those reported for comparator agents. Myelosuppression has been reported after prolonged administration but is reversible after discontinuation of the drug. Overall, linezolid has favorable efficacy and safety profiles and will be an increasingly useful option for the treatment of SSTIs, particularly those due to multidrug-resistant, gram-positive organisms.

Acetamides↗
PubMed2005

Linezolid-induced optic neuropathy.

PURPOSE: To report a case of optic neuropathy associated with prolonged use of a new antibiotic, linezolid. DESIGN: Interventional case report. METHODS: Optic and peripheral neuropathy occurred in a 27-year-old woman who was undergoing prolonged linezolid therapy for osteomyelitis. The use of corticosteroid exacerbated visual loss. Discontinuation of the linezolid therapy resulted in marked improvement of optic neuropathy. RESULTS: Linezolid-induced optic neuropathy was diagnosed in this case, because prolonged linezolid therapy was performed at a higher dose than usual and because the patient recovered after linezolid therapy was discontinued. CONCLUSIONS: With prolonged linezolid therapy, ophthalmologists should be aware that bilateral optic neuropathy can occur and that corticosteroids are not indicated for this neuropathy.

Acetamides↗
PubMed2005

Comparative in vitro activities of daptomycin, linezolid, and quinupristin/dalfopristin against Gram-positive bacterial isolates from a large cancer center.

Our objective was to evaluate and compare the in vitro activity of daptomycin, linezolid, and quinupristin/dalfopristin against clinical bloodstream isolates of Gram-positive pathogens from a large cancer center in the Northeastern United States. Minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) were determined for daptomycin, quinupristin/dalfopristin, and linezolid against 258 isolates; bactericidal activity was evaluated using time-kill experiments against 14 representative pathogens. Vancomycin-resistant enterococci represented the largest proportion of bacteria tested (32% of the isolates), followed by methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative staphylococci (23%), and vancomycin sensitive enterococci (14%). Against staphylococci, the MIC90 was 1 microg/mL for both daptomycin and quinupristin/dalfopristin and 4 microg/mL for linezolid. Against enterococci, the MIC90 for both daptomycin and linezolid was 4 microg/mL and was 16 microg/mL for quinupristin/dalfopristin. The quinupristin/dalfopristin MIC90 for Enterococcus faecium was 2 microg/mL. Two enterococci were linezolid resistant and remained susceptible to daptomycin. In vitro time-kill studies found daptomycin to be rapidly bactericidal against the majority of organisms tested, killing 99.9% of bacteria within 6 h. Quinupristin/dalfopristin was bactericidal against staphylococci and bacteriostatic against most enterococci. Linezolid was bacteriostatic against all organisms evaluated. Daptomycin, quinupristin/dalfopristin, and linezolid each demonstrated in vitro activity against this collection of organisms. Future clinical studies to evaluate a potential role for these agents in the management of infections in cancer patients, including the treatment of febrile neutropenia, appear warranted.

Acetamides↗
PubMed2003

Cost analysis of switching from i.v. vancomycin to p.o. linezolid for the management of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus species.

BACKGROUND: Infections with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus species (MRSS) are associated with higher treatment costs than infections with methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus species in the United States--partly because of an increased length of hospital stay (LOS). OBJECTIVE: This study used pharmacoeconomic modeling to evaluate the costs and outcomes associated with the use of i.v. vancomycin compared with p.o. linezolid in the treatment of MRSS-infected patients. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was used to determine the number of cases with confirmed or presumed MRSS infections treated with i.v. vancomycin during calendar-year 2000 at the Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System inpatient facility. Patients who were eligible for a switch to p.o. linezolid with or without early discharge to home were identified. Cost differences associated with conversion from i.v. to p.o. therapy (compared with continued i.v. therapy) were estimated based on a mean decreased LOS and a decrease in the costs associated with catheter-related adverse events. Rates and costs of catheter-related adverse events were based on estimates from the literature. Sensitivity analyses were performed by variation of the estimated mean LOS decrease in the SD and by variation of the estimates for incidence and costs related to catheter complications. Costs were measured in year 2000 US dollars, and differences were not assessed for statistical significance. RESULTS: Of 177 patients treated with i.v. vancomycin, 103 (58%) were eligible for conversion to p.o. linezolid and 55 (31%) were eligible for early discharge from the hospital with continuation of p.o. therapy. Early discharge was associated with a mean (SD) LOS decrease of 3.3 (2.9) days. Annual mean total cost savings in patients eligible for conversion from i.v. vancomycin to p.o. linezolid with early discharge were $294,750 (range, $35,730-$553,790). For cases eligible for inpatient conversion from i.v. vancomycin to p.o. linezolid therapy (n=48), the mean total annual cost difference was an increase of $6340 for p.o. linezolid (range, -$12,910 to $11,900). CONCLUSION: These results--although partly based on estimates from the literature, rather than direct measurements--support the use of p.o. linezolid with or without early discharge as a potential cost-savings alternative for eligible patients treated with a full course of i.v. vancomycin for suspected or confirmed MRSS infection.

Acetamides↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Multi-laboratory assessment of the linezolid spectrum of activity using the Kirby-Bauer disk diffusion method: Report of the Zyvox Antimicrobial Potency Study (ZAPS) in the United States.

The in vitro activity of linezolid against common Gram-positive pathogens was compared to that of penicillin or ampicillin or oxacillin (depending upon genus), cefazolin, erythromycin, clindamycin, quinupristin/dalfopristin, levofloxacin, nitrofurantoin and vancomycin by disk diffusion methods. One hundred and six centers (31 states in US) tested recent clinical isolates of Staphylococcus aureus, coagulase-negative staphylococci, Enterococcus faecium, E. faecalis, Streptococcus pneumoniae, and other streptococci. Testing was conducted using the standardized disk diffusion method and concurrent quality control testing was performed. Strains with linezolid zone diameters of < or = 20 mm were requested for referral to the microbiology monitor for confirmation. A total of 3,100 isolates (97% compliance) were tested. Susceptibility (zone diameters, > or = 21 mm) of staphylococci and streptococci to linezolid was reported in 100% and 99.4% of staphylococci and streptococci, respectively. Susceptibility (zone diameters, > or = 23 mm) of enterococci to linezolid was 96.0% with only three isolates (0.4%) reported as resistant (zone diameters, < or = 20 mm; unconfirmed). Among a total of nine isolates (0.3%) reported to have zone diameters 20 mm, six were not submitted for further testing, two were contaminated with Gram-negative bacilli and one was determined to be linezolid-susceptible. There were no differences in linezolid susceptibility in the vancomycin- or oxacillin- or penicillin-resistant subsets of strains. This susceptibility pattern for US medical centers is indicative of the excellent and nearly complete in vitro activity against the key Gram-positive pathogens for which linezolid has received US Food and Drug Administration indications for clinical use.

Acetamides↗
PubMed2004

Linezolid disposition after standard dosages in critically ill patients undergoing continuous venovenous hemofiltration: a report of 2 cases.

Linezolid is a new oxazolidinone antibiotic active against most Gram-positive microorganisms the renal elimination of which accounts for about 30% to 35% of all the clearance. Its pharmacokinetic ability was assessed during continuous venovenous hemofiltration (CVVH) in 2 anuric patients with severe postsurgical intraabdominal infections who were receiving standard dosages (600 mg intravenously twice a day). Blood samples for quantification of linezolid in plasma and in filtrate were collected after more than 4 days of therapy before dosing and at 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, and 11 hours after the morning 1-hour intravenous infusion, and concentrations were determined by means of high-performance liquid chromatography. Linezolid was partially cleared by CVVH in both the patients (hemofiltration clearance [CL CVVH ] = 0.38 and 0.35 mL/min/kg), with high sieving coefficient values (0.76 to 0.92). Efficacious plasma exposure for time-dependent antibacterial activity of linezolid, either in terms of trough levels above minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) at which 90% of the isolates are inhibited (Cmin >MIC90 ) or of area under the plasma concentration time curve to MIC90 ratio (AUC/MIC90 ) >100 hours, was ensured during CVVH in both patients. However, despite similar CL CVVH , significant interindividual pharmacokinetic variability was found in the 2 patients (AUC during the observational period [AUC 0-tau ] 334.71 versus 109.34 mg/L x h), mainly owing to substantial differences in non-CVVH-related clearance of linezolid (total CL, 0.55 versus 1.21 mL/min/kg). Our findings indicate that linezolid, although partially removed, does not warrant dosage modification during the first 48 hours when CVVH (with polysulfide hemofilter) at standard 2,000 mL/h substitution flow rate in predilution is applied to anuric patients. Thereafter, this choice is a reasonable one with the exception of those patients who have other features of linezolid toxicity and in which non-CVVH-related clearance might be impaired, although further evaluations are warranted.

Acetamides↗
PubMed2002

Linezolid resistance in Staphylococcus aureus: characterization and stability of resistant phenotype.

Linezolid is an important therapeutic option for treatment of infections caused by glycopeptide- and beta-lactam-resistant gram-positive organisms. Linezolid resistance is caused by mutations within the domain V region of the 23S ribosomal RNA (rRNA) gene, which is present in multiple copies in most bacteria. Among clinical Staphylococcus aureus isolates, there has been only 1 reported case of linezolid resistance. In the present study, this isolate was further characterized by determination of the number of mutant 23S rRNA copies, assessment of the stability of the resistant phenotype, and comparison of its growth characteristics with those of linezolid-susceptible S. aureus. All 5 copies of the 23S rRNA gene contained a G2576U mutation in the domain V region. After serial passage on antibiotic-free medium, the isolate maintained resistance to high concentrations of linezolid. Compared with 2 linezolid-susceptible S. aureus isolates, the linezolid-resistant S. aureus isolate demonstrated no significant differences in in vitro growth characteristics.

Acetamides↗
PubMed2003

Effect of linezolid versus vancomycin on length of hospital stay in patients with complicated skin and soft tissue infections caused by known or suspected methicillin-resistant staphylococci: results from a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Complicated skin and soft tissue infections are common surgical indications usually requiring patients to be hospitalized, and are often caused by gram-positive bacteria, including methicillin-resistant staphylococci such as MRSA. Vancomycin has been the standard treatment for methicillin-resistant staphylococcal infections in many countries, but its intravenous-only formulation for systemic infections often confines patients to the hospital for the treatment. Linezolid, a novel oxazolidinone antibiotic available in intravenous and 100% bioavailable oral forms, was shown in a randomized trial to be as efficacious as vancomycin for suspected or proven methicillin-resistant staphylococcal infections. To determine if oral linezolid can reduce length of hospital stay (LOS) when compared to vancomycin, we compared the LOS for the 230 complicated skin and soft tissue infection patients enrolled in this trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients received up to four weeks of linezolid (intravenous followed by optional oral) or vancomycin (intravenous only), followed by up to four weeks of observation. Unadjusted LOS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier survival functions, whereas the log-logistic survival analysis model was used to estimate the multivariate-adjusted LOS controlling for patient demographics and selected baseline clinical variables. Analysis was done on the intent-to-treat (n = 230) sample as well as on two subsamples of the clinically evaluable (n = 144) and surgical site infection (n = 114) patients. RESULTS: The unadjusted Kaplan-Meier median LOS was five days shorter for the linezolid group than the vancomycin group in the intent-to-treat sample (9 vs. 14 days, p = 0.052). It was eight days shorter (8 vs. 16 days, p = 0.0025) in the clinically evaluable sample, but the difference in the surgical site infection sample was not significant (10 vs. 14 days; p = 0.29). The linezolid group's unadjusted mean LOS was 1.7, 5.3 and 0.8 days shorter in the intentto-treat, clinically evaluable, and surgical site infection samples, respectively. After adjusting for age, gender, race, geographic region, bacteremia, type of inpatient location, and number of concurrent medical conditions using the log-logistic model, between-treatment differences in the multivariate-adjusted median LOS decreased to 3, 6, and 3 days, whereas the differences in mean LOS increased to 3.1, 6.5 and 2.5 days for the intent-to-treat, clinically evaluable, and surgical site infection samples (p < 0.01, < 0.01, and < 0.10), respectively. When the between-treatment differences in LOS were expressed as odds ratio of hospital discharges, multivariate-adjustment increased the odds ratios in favor of linezolid for all the three samples. CONCLUSION: Results from this randomized trial show that linezolid can significantly reduce LOS for patients with complicated skin and soft tissue infections from suspected or confirmed methicillin-resistant staphylococci.

Acetamides↗
PubMed2002

Linezolid: an oxazolidinone antimicrobial agent.

The pharmacology, antimicrobial activity, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy, and adverse effects of linezolid are reviewed. Linezolid, the only oxazolidinone antimicrobial approved for use in the United States, has significant activity against gram-positive bacteria, including penicillin-, cephalosporin-, and vancomycin-resistant species. Linezolid inhibits bacterial protein synthesis via binding to the 50S ribosomal subunit to prevent translation. The drug lacks cross-resistance with other antimicrobials. Linezolid is primarily excreted renally as unchanged drug. The measured plasma half-life of four to five hours permits twice-daily administration for all indicated infections. Virtually complete oral bioavailability allows for 1:1 conversion between the intravenous and oral dosage forms. Controlled comparative clinical trials demonstrate that linezolid is effective in the treatment of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections, nosocomial and community-acquired pneumonia, and skin and skin-structure infections due to susceptible organisms. The recommended dosage is 600 mg i.v. or p.o. twice daily for all indications except uncomplicated skin and skin-structure infections (400 mg twice daily); adjustments for mild to moderate renal or hepatic impairment are not necessary. Clinically important interactions with monoamine oxidase inhibitors have not been observed. Reversible myelosuppression has been observed in a few patients. Linezolid has gram-positive activity comparable to that of vancomycin, is effective in a variety of infections, and is well tolerated, with diarrhea, headache, and nausea being the most frequently reported adverse effects. Linezolid provides a reasonable therapeutic alternative for patients with vancomycin-resistant E. faecium infections and patients infected with MRSA who cannot tolerate vancomycin.

Acetamides↗
PubMed2002

The in vitro and in vivo antibacterial characterization of vancomycin and linezolid against vancomycin-susceptible and -resistant enterococci.

The present study was designed to compare in vitro antibacterial activities of linezolid and vancomycin against vancomycin-susceptible Enterococcus faecalis (VSEF) and vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) isolated in Japan with those of quinupristin-dalfopristin, teicoplanin and minocycline, and the in vitro short time bactericidal activity and the in vivo activities of linezolid and vancomycin against vancomycin-susceptible and -resistant E. faecalis. The MIC90s of linezolid, quinupristin-dalfopristin, vancomycin, teicoplanin and minocycline for VSEF and VRE were both 2 mg/L, both 2 mg/L, 2 and >128 mg/L, 0.25 and >128 mg/L, and both 32 mg/L, respectively. The efficacy of linezolid for mice with bacteraemia caused by VSEF was similar to that of vancomycin, but the elimination ratio of viable organisms from the blood of mice treated with vancomycin was significantly higher than in linezolid-treated and untreated mice at 2 h post-administration, and those of the two groups at 4 and 6 h were significantly higher than in untreated mice. Moreover, linezolid was highly active in mice with bacteraemia caused by vancomycin-resistant E. faecalis because this drug had potent in vitro activity against the organisms. Our results indicate that linezolid is suitable for the treatment of VRE and VSEF bacteraemia, and vancomycin is suitable for VSEF bacteraemia.

Acetamides↗
PubMed2003

Multicentre evaluation of the in vitro activity of linezolid in the Western Pacific.

Multiresistance to antimicrobial agents is common in staphylococci and pneumococci isolates in the Western Pacific region. The activity of linezolid, a new oxazolidinone, was evaluated against a spectrum of Gram-positive species collected in the region. Eighteen laboratories from six countries in the Western Pacific examined the linezolid susceptibility of 2143 clinical isolates of Staphylococcus aureus, coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) and Enterococcus spp. using broth microdilution or disc diffusion methodology. For Streptococcus pneumoniae (n = 351) and other streptococci (n = 83), Etest (AB Biodisk, Solna, Sweden) strips were used. Results were compared with other common and important antimicrobials. Linezolid-resistant strains were not detected among streptococci or staphylococci, including a significant proportion of S. aureus strains that were multiresistant. Almost all enterococci, including 14 vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium, were linezolid susceptible. A small proportion of enterococci (0.8%) were intermediate to linezolid, and one strain of Enterococcus faecalis had a zone diameter of 20 mm (resistant). The linezolid MIC ranges (MIC(90)) of those strains tested by broth microdilution or Etest were: 1-4 mg/L (2 mg/L) for S. aureus, 0.5-4 mg/L (2 mg/L) for CoNS, 0.5-4 mg/L (2 mg/L) for Enterococcus spp., 0.12-2 mg/L (1 mg/L) for S. pneumoniae and 0.25-2 mg/L (1 mg/L) for Streptococcus spp. There was no difference in linezolid susceptibility between countries or between multiresistant and susceptible strains of each species monitored.

Acetamides↗
PubMed2003

In vitro activity of linezolid alone and in combination with gentamicin, vancomycin or rifampicin against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus by time-kill curve methods.

The in vitro activity of the oxazolidinone linezolid was studied alone and in combination with three antibiotics acting on different cellular targets. Oxazolidinones are bacterial protein synthesis inhibitors that act at a very early stage by preventing the formation of the initiation complex. Combinations of linezolid with gentamicin, vancomycin or rifampicin were evaluated against four methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus strains, using killing curves in conjunction with scanning electron microscopy. Time-kill curves were performed over 24 h using an inoculum of 5 x 10(6)- 1 x 10(7) cfu/mL. Linezolid was studied at concentrations of 1 x, 4 x and 8 x MIC, with partner drugs at 8 x MIC. Addition of linezolid resulted in a decrease of antibacterial activity for gentamicin and vancomycin, and linezolid was antagonistic to the early bactericidal activity of gentamicin. Linezolid, in combination with rifampicin, showed an additive interaction for susceptible strains and inhibited rifampicin-resistant variants. Linezolid plus rifampicin appeared to be the most active combination against methicillin-resistant S. aureus strains in time-kill experiments.

Acetamides↗
PubMed2004

Serum and sputum concentrations following the oral administration of linezolid in adult patients with cystic fibrosis.

OBJECTIVES: Linezolid is a new oxazolidinone antibiotic with efficacy against a broad range of Gram-positive bacteria, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). In this study, we have determined the serum and sputum linezolid concentrations in adults with cystic fibrosis (CF) following oral drug administration. METHODS: Eleven adult patients with CF were recruited. Subjects received 600 mg of linezolid orally every 12 h for a total of six doses. Serum and sputum levels were measured just before and at 2 h after the final dose of linezolid. A further serum level was measured at 4 h. RESULTS: Ten adult patients completed the study. Mean (s.d.) serum linezolid concentrations were 2.3 mg/L (1.5) at 12 h following the fifth dose. At 2 and 4 h following the sixth dose, concentrations were 13.5 (4.3) and 8.1 (3.3). Mean (s.d.) linezolid sputum concentrations were 3.6 (2.1) and 17.4 (7.2) mg/L at 0 and 2 h following drug administration. CONCLUSIONS: The oral administration of linezolid results in good sputum penetration in patients with CF. Mean levels exceed the required MIC for the treatment of MRSA for >80% of the dosing period for serum and the majority of the dosing period for sputum.

Acetamides↗
PubMed2004

Reversal of linezolid-associated cytopenias, but not peripheral neuropathy, by administration of vitamin B6.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine if vitamin B6 therapy would reverse linezolid-associated cytopenias and/or peripheral neuropathy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We have recently treated two patients with disseminated Mycobacterium abscessus infections with prolonged (> or =9 month) courses of linezolid. Both patients developed cytopenias related to linezolid, and one patient also developed peripheral neuropathy. Because continuing linezolid therapy was required, we administered vitamin B6 (50 mg orally once a day) in an attempt to mitigate the associated cytopenias. RESULTS: The cytopenias in both patients reversed following administration of vitamin B6, and stabilized during prolonged linezolid therapy, although the peripheral neuropathy did not. CONCLUSIONS: Vitamin B6 treatment may be useful to prevent or modify the course of linezolid-associated cytopenias. More formal and rigorous study of vitamin B6 therapy in patients receiving prolonged courses of linezolid is warranted.

Acetamides↗
PubMed2005

Linezolid in the treatment of Gram-positive prosthetic joint infections.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of linezolid in the treatment of Gram-positive prosthetic hip and knee infections. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective evaluation of patients hospitalized in the Department of Infectious Diseases of San Martino Hospital in Genoa with the diagnosis of Gram-positive prosthetic joint infection and treated with intravenous and/or oral linezolid. Primary end points were the patient clinical outcome at the end of treatment and at long-term follow-up (up to 12 months after the end of treatment). RESULTS: Between May 1999 and September 2003, 20 patients with prosthetic joint infection were treated with linezolid. Pathogens isolated were: methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), 14 strains; methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative staphylococci, five strains; and Enterococcus spp., one strain. The overall duration of treatment was 7.2 +/- 2 weeks (range 6-10 weeks). Patients were given intravenous therapy for 3-7 days as inpatients, then were changed as outpatients to oral therapy under weekly laboratory testing. At long-term follow-up (1 year), we observed four cases of failure due to relapsing infections. The other 16 patients treated with linezolid did not need further surgical substitution of prosthesis or surgical joint revision. Linezolid was well tolerated, and no drug-related events leading to discontinuation of treatment were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: Our data indicate that linezolid may be an effective alternative therapy for orthopaedic infections caused by Gram-positive resistant pathogens and that a prospective and comparative evaluation of linezolid in this setting is necessary.

Acetamides↗
PubMed2006

Measurement of ampicillin, vancomycin, linezolid and gentamicin activity against enterococcal biofilms.

BACKGROUND: Enterococci frequently cause biofilm infections but susceptibility of clinical isolates growing in biofilms has not been investigated. The minimum biofilm eradicating concentration (MBEC) has been suggested as a guide to treatment of biofilm infections. We measured an alternative endpoint, the minimum biofilm inhibitory concentration (MBIC) and compared the results with MIC and MBC. OBJECTIVES: To compare the MIC, MBC and MBIC of ampicillin, vancomycin and linezolid against enterococcal biofilms, to assess the impact of additional gentamicin and correlate findings with clinical outcome. METHODS: MIC and MBC were measured using standard techniques. MBICs were measured using a modification of the Calgary biofilm device method. Fifty-eight enterococcal isolates from episodes of intravascular catheter-related bloodstream infection were tested. RESULTS: Tolerance to ampicillin, vancomycin and linezolid was seen in 93%, 100% and 93% of isolates, respectively. MIC(90)s of ampicillin, vancomycin and linezolid were all 4 mg/L for Enterococcus faecalis isolates. MBC(90)s of ampicillin, vancomycin and linezolid for E. faecalis isolates were 1024, >128 and 2048 mg/L, respectively. MBIC(90)s of ampicillin, vancomycin and linezolid for E. faecalis isolates were 8192, 4096 and 4096 mg/L, respectively. Results for Enterococcus faecium were similar for vancomycin and linezolid but this species was generally more resistant to ampicillin. Adding 10 mg/L gentamicin had a variable effect on MIC, MBC or MBIC, which was not predictable by gentamicin susceptibility on disc testing. CONCLUSIONS: Very high concentrations of ampicillin, vancomycin and linezolid are required to inhibit enterococcal biofilms in vitro. Combining these agents with gentamicin significantly reduced MIC, MBC and MBIC against only a proportion of enterococcal isolates. No correlation between MBIC and outcome was found.

Acetamides↗
PubMed2006

Linezolid for the treatment of patients with endocarditis: a systematic review of the published evidence.

BACKGROUND: Linezolid is a bacteriostatic oxazolidinone antibiotic that has been proven to be effective for the treatment of patients with pneumonia, skin and soft tissue infections, and possibly bacteraemia, due to Gram-positive cocci. However, the drug is sometimes used for the treatment of patients with endocarditis due to Gram-positive cocci resistant to other antibiotics. METHODS: We carried out a review of the available literature to evaluate whether linezolid is also effective for the treatment of patients with infective endocarditis. RESULTS: We identified 23 case reports and 3 case series reporting the experience with 56 patients with endocarditis treated with linezolid. Evaluable data for 33 patients who received linezolid and for whom individual patient data were reported were further analysed. Prosthetic valve infective endocarditis accounted for 25% of the reviewed cases. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-intermediate S. aureus were the most commonly isolated cocci (24.2% and 30.3% of cases, respectively). Linezolid alone was administered to 66.7% of patients while the rest received the antibiotic in combination with rifampicin, gentamicin, fusidic acid or amikacin. A total of 63.6% (21/33) of patients with endocarditis were cured after linezolid administration. The overall and endocarditis-related mortality was 33.3% (11/33) and 12.1% (4/33), respectively. Thrombocytopenia developed in 30.8% (8/26) of patients for whom relevant data were available. CONCLUSIONS: The limited available evidence suggests that linezolid may be considered as a therapeutic option for the treatment of patients with endocarditis due to multidrug-resistant Gram-positive cocci. However, further published experience is needed to answer the question of whether a bacteriostatic antibiotic could be proven beneficial for patients with an infection for which bactericidal antibiotics have been traditionally used.

Acetamides↗
PubMed2001

Cardiovascular sympathomimetic amine interactions in rats treated with monoamine oxidase inhibitors and the novel oxazolidinone antibiotic linezolid.

Linezolid (PNU-100766) is a new gram-positive oxazolidinone antibiotic that is effective at in vitro concentrations < or =4 microg/ml and in vivo doses < or =10 mg/kg. Because linezolid also competitively inhibits human monoamine oxidase-A (MAO-A; Ki = 55 microM), we monitored its effects on the cardiovascular responses to tyramine and amine cold remedies in comparison with standard MAO inhibitors. In anesthetized rats, the pressor response to 16 microg i.v. tyramine was potentiated by the MAO-A inhibitors clorgyline (0.1-1.0 mg/kg i.v.) and moclobemide (5.0-50 mg/kg p.o.), but not by the MAO-B inhibitor selegiline (0.15-15 mg/kg p.o.). Fifteen milligrams per kilogram intravenous linezolid weakly potentiated i.v. tyramine independent of changes in alpha-adrenoceptor reactivity, but this effect was not enhanced chronically (90-100 mg/kg/day). In conscious rats, 30 mg/kg/day oral linezolid (8 microg/ml plasma concentration) minimally affected the pressor response to 20 mg/kg oral tyramine, whereas 100 mg/kg/day linezolid (20 microg/ml plasma concentration) moderately potentiated this response similar to 3 mg/kg per day moclobemide. Linezolid's tyramine potentiation was reversible, attenuated by food, and independent of pseudoephedrine, phenylpropanolamine, and dextromethorphan interactions. These studies demonstrate that high-dose linezolid only moderately potentiates the cardiovascular effects of tyramine and validate these models for evaluating such MAO inhibitory interactions.

Acetamides↗