Determination of MIC Distribution of Arbekacin, Cefminox, Fosfomycin, Biapenem and Other Antibiotics against Gram-Negative Clinical Isolates in South India: A Prospective Study

Abstract

Objectives

To determine the in vitro activity of antibiotics, including arbekacin, cefminox, fosfomycin and biapenem which are all still unavailable in India, against Gram-negative clinical isolates.

Methods

We prospectively collected and tested all consecutive isolates of Escherichia coli, Klebsiella spp., Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Acinetobacter spp. from blood, urine and sputum samples between March and November 2012. The minimum inhibition concentration (MIC) of 16 antibiotics was determined by the broth micro-dilution method.

Results

Overall 925 isolates were included; 211 E. coli, 207 Klebsiella spp., 153 P. aeruginosa, and 354 Acinetobacter spp. The MIC₅₀ and MIC₉₀ were high for cefminox, biapenem and arbekacin for all pathogens but interpretative criteria were not available. The MIC₅₀ was categorized as susceptible for a couple of antibiotics, including piperacillin/tazobactam, carbapenems and amikacin, for E. coli, Klebsiella spp. and P. aeruginosa. However, for Acinetobacter spp., the MIC₅₀ was categorized as susceptible only for colistin. On the other hand, fosfomycin was the only antibiotic that inhibited 90% of E. coli and Klebsiella spp. isolates, while 90% of P. aeruginosa isolates were inhibited only by colistin. Finally, 90% of Acinetobacter spp. isolates were not inhibited by any antibiotic tested.

Conclusion

Fosfomycin and colistin might be promising antibiotics for the treatment of infections due to E. coli or Klebsiella spp. and P. aeruginosa, respectively, in India; however, clinical trials should first corroborate the in vitro findings. The activity of tigecycline should be evaluated, as this is commonly used as last-resort option for the treatment of multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter infections.

About the Authors:

Sangeetha Rajenderan

Affiliation: Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, South India

Veeraraghavan Balaji

Affiliation: Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, South India

Shalini Anandan

Affiliation: Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, South India

Rani Diana Sahni

Affiliation: Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, South India

Giannoula S. Tansarli

Affiliation: Alfa Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Athens, Greece

Matthew E. Falagas

* E-mail: [email protected]

Affiliations Alfa Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Athens, Greece, Department of Internal Medicine - Infectious Diseases, Iaso General Hospital, Iaso Group, Athens, Greece, Department of Medicine, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America

Introduction

Antimicrobial resistance has risen alarmingly worldwide during the last decade. The widespread of Gram-negative organisms producing extended-spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBLs) conferring resistance to penicillins, cephalosporins, and fluoroquinolones, or carbapenemases conferring resistance even to carbapenems limits significantly the treatment armamentarium against infections. India is one of the countries facing the greatest burden of antimicrobial resistance around the world. The high availability of antibiotics over the counter in the country is major contributor in the high antimicrobial resistance observed. New-Delhi Metallo-β-lactamase (NDM)-producing Enterobacteriaceae, which were first detected here, [1] are now endemic in India. [2] Carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae cause difficult-to-treat infections usually characterized by high mortality. [3], [4] Furthermore, high prevalence of infections caused by carbapenemase-producing Acinetobacter baumannii [5], [6], [7] and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, [6], [8] as well as of infections caused by ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae has been observed in India [9], [10], [11].

The introduction into clinical practice of antibiotics that are still unavailable in India could be a solution to the problem of the antimicrobial resistance. Arbekacin, the cephamycin cefminox, and the group 2 carbapenem biapenem are effective antibiotics, mainly used in Japan and South Korea. Arbekacin is primarily used for the treatment of infections caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus [12] and few in vitro data suggest that this antibiotic might be also considered as an adjunct treatment for infections due to multidrug-resistant (MDR) Gram-negative pathogens., [13], [14] Cefminox is active against anaerobic bacteria [15] as well as ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae. [16] As regards biapenem, this is active against Gram-negative and Gram-positive anaerobic bacteria, [17], [18] but also against aerobic bacteria, both alone [19] and in combination with other agents against MDR pathogens. [20] Finally, fosfomycin, which is also not marketed in India, is an “old” antibiotic, discovered in the late 60’s which has been re-evaluated the last years and re-introduced successfully into clinical practice in many countries of the world. [21], [22], [23] Fosfomycin has broad antimicrobial spectrum against MDR pathogens, both Gram-negative [24] and Gram-positive ones [25].

In this context, we aimed to determine the minimum inhibition concentration (MIC)₅₀ (the antibiotic concentration required to inhibit the growth of 50% of the pathogens) and MIC₉₀ (the antibiotic concentration required to inhibit the growth of 90% of the pathogens) of antibiotics, including arbekacin, cefminox, biapenem and fosfomycin for common Gram-negative clinical isolates collected from patients with hospital- or community-acquired infections in a tertiary care hospital, in South India.

Methods

Study design and setting

This prospective study was performed at the Christian Medical College, Vellore, South India, at the Department of Clinical Microbiology, between March and November 2012. All consecutive isolates of E. coli, Klebsiella spp., P. aeruginosa, and Acinetobacter spp. isolated from the urine, blood, and sputum were included in the study. Only one isolate per patient was included in the study. Data on the demographic details of patients whose isolates were studied was not included.

Ethics considerations

The study was approved by the Institutional review board and ethics committee of Christian Medical College, Vellore, South India. A written or oral informed consent was not obtained by the patients whose isolates were included in this study due to the non-interventional study design and this consent procedure was approved by the ethics committee of our institution.

Microbiological methods

Isolation and identification of the isolates from the specimens was performed using a semi-quantitative culture method and biochemically characterized using the mannitol motility medium, triple sugar iron agar medium, peptone water and Simmons citrate medium. [26], [27] Identification up to the genus level for Klebsiella and Acinetobacter isolates was performed. An oxidase test was also performed for Acinetobacter spp. and P. aeruginosa and an indole test was performed in order to differentiate between Klebsiella spp. and E. coli. Standard American type culture collection (ATCC) control strains within acceptable limits were used as quality control strains for the drugs tested. E. coli ATCC 25922, Staphylococcus aureus ATCC 29213, P. aeruginosa ATCC 27853 and Enterococcus faecalis ATCC29212 were used for susceptibility testing to ampicillin/sulbactam, piperacillin/tazobactam, cefminox, cefmetazole, ceftazidime, ceftriaxone, aztreonam, fosfomycin, imipenem, meropenem, doripenem, biapenem, amikacin, arbekacin, gentamicin and colistin.

The MIC was determined by the broth micro-dilution method (Meiji Co., Japan) using cation-adjusted Muller-Hinton broth. The inoculum was prepared by the growth method with which the test bacteria were grown on non-selective culture media and incubated overnight. On the following day, 4–5 colonies were taken from that plate and suspended into 2 ml of nutrient broth and incubated for 2 hours. The bacterial inoculum was adjusted to 1 McFarland Standard by sterilized physiological saline. Then, 25 µL of the inoculum was added into 12 mL of cation-adjusted Mueller-Hinton broth (CAMHB) and 50 µL of the mixture was inoculated into each plate. The final inoculum size was approximately 2.5×10⁴ CFU of bacteria in each plate. Finally, the inoculated plates were incubated at 35±2°C in ambient air for 20–24 hours for Acinetobacter spp. or 16–20 hours for the other bacteria.

Definitions and data analysis

The MIC range, MIC₅₀, and MIC₉₀ were determined for cefminox, arbekacin, fosfomycin biapenem, ampicillin/sulbactam, piperacillin/tazobactam, cefmetazole, ceftazidime, ceftriaxone, aztreonam, imipenem, meropenem, doripenem, amikacin, gentamicin and colistin for the 4 pathogens. The interpretation of the MIC₅₀ and MIC₉₀ was performed using the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) 2012 guidelines. [28] The MICs for fosfomycin were reported as susceptible (≤64 µg/ml), intermediate (128 µg/ml), or resistant (≥256 µg/ml). Interpretative criteria of the MIC are not available by CLSI for cefminox, biapenem and arbekacin for any of the four pathogens tested and for fosfomycin for P. aeruginosa and Acinetobacter spp.

Results

A total of 925 isolates were collected and tested during the study period; 211 isolates of E. coli, 207 of Klebsiella spp., 153 of P. aeruginosa, and 354 of Acinetobacter spp. With regard to the source of isolation, 363 originated from the sputum, 362 isolates from the blood, and 200 isolates from the urine. 74% and 75% of the isolates identified in the blood and urine, respectively, were Enterobacteriaceae, while 87.9% and 12.1% of the isolates identified in the sputum were Acinetobacter and P. aeruginosa, respectively. The pathogens by source of isolation are presented in Table 1. The isolates originated from medical, surgical, and critical care departments of the hospital.

[Figure omitted. See PDF.]

Table 1. Pathogens by source of isolation.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0103253.t001

E. coli

The MIC range, MIC₅₀, and MIC₉₀ of all antibiotics tested are presented in Table 2. The MIC₅₀ was low for piperacillin/tazobactam, cefmetazole, fosfomycin, imipenem, meropenem, doripenem, and amikacin (8/4, 1, 0.5, 0.12, ≤0.06, ≤0.03, and 2 µg/ml, respectively). These values are categorized as susceptible by CLSI. The only antibiotic with low MIC₉₀, categorized as susceptible, was fosfomycin (0.5 µg/ml). Both MIC₅₀ and MIC₉₀ were low for colistin, 0.25 and 0.5 µg/ml respectively, while low MIC₅₀ was found for cefminox, biapenem, and arbekacin (1, ≤0.06, and 2 µg/ml, respectively). However, interpretative criteria were not available for any of these antibiotics.

[Figure omitted. See PDF.]

Table 2. Determination and interpretation of the MIC values of the antibiotics tested for Escherichia coli (n = 211).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0103253.t002

Klebsiella spp

The MIC range, MIC_50, and MIC₉₀ of all antibiotics tested are presented in Table 3. The MIC₅₀ for piperacillin/tazobactam, cefmetazole, fosfomycin, imipenem, meropenem, doripenem, and amikacin was low, categorized as susceptible (4/4, 2, 8, 0.25, ≤0.06, 0.06, and 2 µg/ml, respectively). Fosfomycin was the only antibiotic with low MIC₉₀ (32 µg/ml), within the susceptible range.

[Figure omitted. See PDF.]

Table 3. Determination and interpretation of the MIC values of the antibiotics tested for Klebsiella spp. (n = 207).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0103253.t003

P. aeruginosa

The MIC range, MIC₅₀, and MIC₉₀ of all antibiotics tested are presented in Table 4. The MIC₅₀ was low, categorized as susceptible, for piperacillin/tazobactam, ceftazidime, aztreonam, doripenem, amikacin, gentamicin, and colistin (8/4, 8, 4, 2, 4, 2, and 1 µg/ml, respectively), while only colistin had low MIC₉₀ which was in the susceptible range (2 µg/ml).

[Figure omitted. See PDF.]

Table 4. Determination and interpretation of the MIC values of the antibiotics tested for Pseudomonas aeruginosa^** (n = 153).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0103253.t004

Acinetobacter spp

The MIC range, MIC₅₀, and MIC₉₀ of all antibiotics tested are presented in Table 5. The MIC₅₀ was low (0.5 µg/ml) and within the susceptible range only for colistin, while the MIC₉₀ value was not low for any antibiotic.

[Figure omitted. See PDF.]

Table 5. Determination and interpretation of the MIC values of the antibiotics tested for Acinetobacter spp.^**(n = 354).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0103253.t005

In Table 6 the resistance profile of the included isolates to cefminox, biapenem, and arbekacin is presented in detail.

[Figure omitted. See PDF.]

Table 6. Resistance profile of the included isolates to the study drugs.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0103253.t006

Discussion

The main finding of the study is that fosfomycin was the only antibiotic that inhibited 90% of E. coli and Klebsiella spp. isolates, while colistin was the only antibiotic that inhibited 90% of P. aeruginosa isolates. In addition, 90% of Acinetobacter spp. isolates were not inhibited by any antibiotic tested.

Among the four antibiotics that were tested and are still not marketed in India, only fosfomycin seems to be a promising treatment option. However, the development of resistance during treatment with fosfomycin is an issue that has not been clarified yet and thus, fosfomycin should not be administered as monotherapy. [29] Interpretation of the antimicrobial susceptibility testing results could not be performed for arbekacin, cefminox, and biapenem. However, the MIC₉₀ of these antibiotics was high for all four pathogens. Only biapenem was active against 50% of E. coli and Klebsiella spp. isolates (MIC₅₀≤0.25 µg/ml for both pathogens) according to a previous study that attempted to suggest rational breakpoints for biapenem. [20] On the contrary, the MIC₅₀ of arbekacin was very high for Acinetobacter spp. (>128 µg/ml) according to potential breakpoints suggested by one study (<2 µg/ml) [30].

It is noteworthy that piperacillin/tazobactam, cefmetazole, group 2 carbapenems, fosfomycin and amikacin were active against 50% of E. coli and Klebsiella spp. isolates but only fosfomycin retained this activity against 90% of these pathogens. Likewise, piperacillin/tazobactam, ceftazidime, aztreonam, doripenem, amikacin and gentamicin were active against 50% of P. aeruginosa isolates but colistin was the only antibiotic active against 90% of the isolates. The finding of the high in vitro activity of fosfomycin against E. coli has also been illustrated in one of our previous studies which evaluated the activity of fosfomycin against common uropathogens in India. [31] In general, the published literature suggests that fosfomycin might be an effective antibiotic against infections caused by MDR, including ESBL-producing, Enterobacteriaceae. [24], [32] Also, previous studies have shown high in vitro activity of colistin against MDR P. aeruginosa isolates, [33], [34] while treatment with colistin resulted in sufficient clinical effectiveness when administered to patients with severe infections due to MDR P. aeruginosa [35], [36], [37].

Regarding the antimicrobial resistance profile of the isolates included in this study, it is noteworthy that the MIC₅₀ was high for extended-spectrum cephalosporins and aztreonam for E. coli and Klebsiella spp. isolates implying that these isolates may be possibly producers of ESBLs. Likewise, the MIC₅₀ for imipenem and meropenem was high for P. aeruginosa and Acinetobacter spp. isolates and thus, these isolates may produce carbapenemases. It arises that high percentages of multidrug- or extensively drug-resistant Gram-negative pathogens are prevalent in this area of South India urging clinicians to consider alternative antibiotic options for the treatment of these infections.

Other interesting findings of this study are the high incidence of Acinetobacter spp. compared to other Gram-negative bacteria as well as the high antimicrobial resistance recorded among Acinetobacter spp. isolates. It is actually discouraging that only colistin was active against 50% of the isolates and 90% of the isolates were not inhibited by any antibiotic tested. Multidrug resistance of Acinetobacter spp. in India is a great concern addressed by previous studies, as well. [38], [39], [40] Tigecycline and colistin are treatment of choice against severe nosocomial infections due to MDR Acinetobacter spp. but emergence of resistance for both antibiotics has been reported in India leading to treatment deadlock. [41] In our study, antimicrobial susceptibility testing for tigecycline was not performed due to economic reasons.

The findings of the present study should be interpreted taking into consideration the limitation that the in vitro activity of tigecycline, which is one the most effective antibiotics used for the treatment of infections caused by Acinetobacter spp., was not tested. In addition, species identification of the Klebsiella and Acinetobacter isolates was not performed and therefore, the incidence and susceptibility of the individual species to the antibiotics tested could not be determined.

In conclusion, fosfomycin and colistin might be effective treatment options against infections caused by E. coli or Klebsiella spp. and P. aeruginosa, respectively, in India. However, clinical trials are needed to confirm the in vitro findings, especially before fosfomycin is introduced into clinical practice. The high antimicrobial resistance observed among Acinetobacter spp. isolates is a great concern which necessitates further investigation through studies evaluating the in vitro activity of tigecycline and antibiotic combinations. With regard to arbekacin, cefminox and biapenem, further microbiological studies are warranted to evaluate the activity of these antibiotics against clinical isolates in India.

Author Contributions

Conceived and designed the experiments: SR VB SA RDS. Performed the experiments: SR VB SA RDS. Analyzed the data: SR VB SA RDS GST MEF. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: SR VB SA RDS GST MEF. Wrote the paper: MEF GST SR VB SA RDS.

Citation: Rajenderan S, Balaji V, Anandan S, Sahni RD, Tansarli GS, Falagas ME (2014) Determination of MIC Distribution of Arbekacin, Cefminox, Fosfomycin, Biapenem and Other Antibiotics against Gram-Negative Clinical Isolates in South India: A Prospective Study. PLoS ONE 9(7): e103253. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0103253

References

1. Yong D, Toleman MA, Giske CG, Cho HS, Sundman K, et al. (2009) Characterization of a new metallo-beta-lactamase gene, bla (NDM-1), and a novel erythromycin esterase gene carried on a unique genetic structure in Klebsiella pneumoniae sequence type 14 from India. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 53: 5046–5054.

2. Gupta N, Limbago BM, Patel JB, Kallen AJ (2011) Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae: epidemiology and prevention. Clin Infect Dis 53: 60–67.

3. Ben-David D, Kordevani R, Keller N, Tal I, Marzel A, et al. (2012) Outcome of carbapenem resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae bloodstream infections. Clin Microbiol Infect 18: 54–60.

4. Chang HJ, Hsu PC, Yang CC, Kuo AJ, Chia JH, et al. (2011) Risk factors and outcomes of carbapenem-nonsusceptible Escherichia coli bacteremia: a matched case-control study. J Microbiol Immunol Infect 44: 125–130.

5. Amudhan SM, Sekar U, Arunagiri K, Sekar B (2011) OXA beta-lactamase-mediated carbapenem resistance in Acinetobacter baumannii. Indian J Med Microbiol 29: 269–274.

6. De AS, Kumar SH, Baveja SM (2010) Prevalence of metallo-beta-lactamase producing Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Acinetobacter species in intensive care areas in a tertiary care hospital. Indian J Crit Care Med 14: 217–219.

7. Sinha N, Agarwal J, Srivastava S, Singh M (2013) Analysis of carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter from a tertiary care setting in North India. Indian J Med Microbiol 31: 60–63.

8. Varaiya A, Kulkarni N, Kulkarni M, Bhalekar P, Dogra J (2008) Incidence of metallo beta lactamase producing Pseudomonas aeruginosa in ICU patients. Indian J Med Res 127: 398–402.

9. Abhilash KP, Veeraraghavan B, Abraham OC (2010) 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 58 Suppl: 13–17.

10. Anandan S, Thomas N, Veeraraghavan B, Jana AK (2009) Prevalence of extended- spectrum beta-lactamase producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella spp in a neonatal intensive care unit. Indian Pediatr 46: 1106–1107.

11. Chaudhuri BN, Rodrigues C, Balaji V, Iyer R, Sekar U, et al. (2011) Incidence of ESBL producers amongst Gram-negative bacilli isolated from intra-abdominal infections across India (based on SMART study, 2007 data). J Assoc Physicians India 59: 287–292.

12. Hwang JH, Lee JH, Moon MK, Kim JS, Won KS, et al. (2012) The usefulness of arbekacin compared to vancomycin. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 31: 1663–1666.

13. Hamada Y, Tamura K, Koyama I, Kuroyama M, Yago K, et al. (2011) Clinical efficacy of arbekacin for Gram-negative bacteria. J Infect Chemother 17: 876–879.

14. Araoka H, Baba M, Tateda K, Ishii Y, Oguri T, et al. (2012) In vitro combination effects of aztreonam and aminoglycoside against multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa in Japan. Jpn J Infect Dis 65: 84–87.

15. Hoellman DB, Spangler SK, Jacobs MR, Appelbaum PC (1998) In vitro activities of cefminox against anaerobic bacteria compared with those of nine other compounds. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 42: 495–501.

16. Lerma M, Cebrian L, Gimenez M, Coronel P, Gimeno M, et al. (2008) beta-lactam susceptibility of Escherichia coli isolates from urinary tract infections exhibiting different resistance phenotypes. Rev Esp Quimioter 21: 149–152.

17. Appelbaum PC, Spangler SK, Jacobs MR (1993) Susceptibility of 539 gram-positive and gram-negative anaerobes to new agents, including RP59500, biapenem, trospectomycin and piperacillin/tazobactam. J Antimicrob Chemother 32: 223–231.

18. Aldridge KE, Morice N, Schiro DD (1994) In vitro activity of biapenem (L-627), a new carbapenem, against anaerobes. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 38: 889–893.

19. Abe N, Komatsu M, Iwasaki M, Nagasaka Y, Fukuda S, et al. (2005) [In vitro activity of antimicrobial agents against clinical isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa]. Jpn J Antibiot 58: 445–451.

20. Livermore DM, Mushtaq S (2013) Activity of biapenem (RPX2003) combined with the boronate beta-lactamase inhibitor RPX7009 against carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae. J Antimicrob Chemother 68: 1825–1831.

21. Michalopoulos A, Virtzili S, Rafailidis P, Chalevelakis G, Damala M, et al. (2010) Intravenous fosfomycin for the treatment of nosocomial infections caused by carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae in critically ill patients: a prospective evaluation. Clin Microbiol Infect 16: 184–186.

22. Pullukcu H, Tasbakan M, Sipahi OR, Yamazhan T, Aydemir S, et al. (2007) Fosfomycin in the treatment of extended spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli-related lower urinary tract infections. Int J Antimicrob Agents 29: 62–65.

23. Senol S, Tasbakan M, Pullukcu H, Sipahi OR, Sipahi H, et al. (2010) Carbapenem versus fosfomycin tromethanol in the treatment of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli-related complicated lower urinary tract infection. J Chemother 22: 355–357.

24. Falagas ME, Kastoris AC, Kapaskelis AM, Karageorgopoulos DE (2010) Fosfomycin for the treatment of multidrug-resistant, including extended-spectrum beta-lactamase producing, Enterobacteriaceae infections: a systematic review. Lancet Infect Dis 10: 43–50.

25. Falagas ME, Roussos N, Gkegkes ID, Rafailidis PI, Karageorgopoulos DE (2009) Fosfomycin for the treatment of infections caused by Gram-positive cocci with advanced antimicrobial drug resistance: a review of microbiological, animal and clinical studies. Expert Opin Investig Drugs 18: 921–944.

26. Winn W, Allen S, Janda W, Koneman E, Procop G, et al.. (2006) Koneman’s Color Atlas and Textbook of Diagnostic Microbiology, 6th edition”. The Enterobacteriaceae. Chapter 6, s.213–293, Lippincott Williams&Wilkins, Baltimore, USA.

27. Winn W, Allen S, Janda W, Koneman E, Procop G, et al.. (2006) Koneman’s Color Atlas and Textbook of Diagnostic Microbiology, 6th edition”. The Nonfermentative Gram-negative Bacilli. Chapter 7, s.309–355, Lippincott Williams&Wilkins, Baltimore, USA.

28. (2012) Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing; Twenty-Second Informational Supplement. Wayne, PA, USA.

29. Bergen PJ, Landersdorfer CB, Lee HJ, Li J, Nation RL (2012) ‘Old’ antibiotics for emerging multidrug-resistant bacteria. Curr Opin Infect Dis 25: 626–633.

30. Zapor MJ, Barber M, Summers A, Miller GH, Feeney LA, et al. (2010) In vitro activity of the aminoglycoside antibiotic arbekacin against Acinetobacter baumannii-calcoaceticus isolated from war-wounded patients at Walter Reed Army Medical Center. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 54: 3015–3017.

31. Sahni RD, Balaji V, Varghese R, John J, Tansarli GS, et al.. (2013) Evaluation of fosfomycin activity against uropathogens in a fosfomycin-naive population in South India: a prospective study. Future Microbiol (in press).

32. Falagas ME, Karageorgopoulos DE, Nordmann P (2011) Therapeutic options for infections with Enterobacteriaceae producing carbapenem-hydrolyzing enzymes. Future Microbiol 6: 653–666.

33. Maraki S, Mavros MN, Kofteridis DP, Samonis G, Falagas ME (2012) Epidemiology and antimicrobial sensitivities of 536 multi-drug-resistant gram-negative bacilli isolated from patients treated on surgical wards. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 13: 326–331.

34. Somily AM, Absar MM, Arshad MZ, Al Aska AI, Shakoor ZA, et al. (2012) Antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Acinetobacter baumannii against carbapenems, colistin, and tigecycline. Saudi Med J 33: 750–755.

35. Durakovic N, Radojcic V, Boban A, Mrsic M, Sertic D, et al. (2011) Efficacy and safety of colistin in the treatment of infections caused by multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa in patients with hematologic malignancy: a matched pair analysis. Intern Med 50: 1009–1013.

36. Falagas ME, Rafailidis PI, Ioannidou E, Alexiou VG, Matthaiou DK, et al. (2010) Colistin therapy for microbiologically documented multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacterial infections: a retrospective cohort study of 258 patients. Int J Antimicrob Agents 35: 194–199.

37. Michalopoulos AS, Tsiodras S, Rellos K, Mentzelopoulos S, Falagas ME (2005) Colistin treatment in patients with ICU-acquired infections caused by multiresistant Gram-negative bacteria: the renaissance of an old antibiotic. Clin Microbiol Infect 11: 115–121.

38. Behera B, Das A, Mathur P, Kapil A, Gadepalli R, et al. (2009) Tigecycline susceptibility report from an Indian tertiary care hospital. Indian J Med Res 129: 446–450.

39. Gladstone P, Rajendran P, Brahmadathan KN (2005) Incidence of carbapenem resistant nonfermenting gram negative bacilli from patients with respiratory infections in the intensive care units. Indian J Med Microbiol 23: 189–191.

40. Sinha M, Srinivasa H, Macaden R (2007) Antibiotic resistance profile & extended spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) production in Acinetobacter species. Indian J Med Res 126: 63–67.

41. Taneja N, Singh G, Singh M, Sharma M (2011) Emergence of tigecycline & colistin resistant Acinetobacter baumanii in patients with complicated urinary tract infections in north India. Indian J Med Res 133: 681–684.