The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Antianaerobic Antimicrobials: Spectrum and Susceptibility Testing
Open accessAbstract
SUMMARY: Susceptibility testing of anaerobic bacteria recovered from selected cases can influence the choice of antimicrobial therapy. The Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) has standardized many laboratory procedures, including anaerobic susceptibility testing (AST), and has published documents for AST. The standardization of testing methods by the CLSI allows comparisons of resistance trends among various laboratories. Susceptibility testing should be performed on organisms recovered from sterile body sites, those that are isolated in pure culture, or those that are clinically important and have variable or unique susceptibility patterns. Organisms that should be considered for individual isolate testing include highly virulent pathogens for which susceptibility cannot be predicted, such as Bacteroides,Prevotella,Fusobacterium, and Clostridium spp.;Bilophila wadsworthia; and Sutterella wadsworthensis. This review describes the current methods for AST in research and reference laboratories. These methods include the use of agar dilution, broth microdilution, Etest, and the spiral gradient endpoint system. The antimicrobials potentially effective against anaerobic bacteria include beta-lactams, combinations of beta-lactams and beta-lactamase inhibitors, metronidazole, chloramphenicol, clindamycin, macrolides, tetracyclines, and fluoroquinolones. The spectrum of efficacy, antimicrobial resistance mechanisms, and resistance patterns against these agents are described.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Gut microbiome correlates of response and toxicity following anti-CD19 CAR T cell therapy
Smith, M., Dai, A., Ghilardi, G., Amelsberg, K. V., Devlin, S. M., Pajarillo, R., Slingerland, J. B., Beghi, S., Herrera, P. S., Giardina, P., et al. (2022) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-022-01702-9 · Cited by 349
Neurons under T Cell Attack Coordinate Phagocyte-Mediated Synaptic Stripping
Di Liberto, G., Pantelyushin, S., Kreutzfeldt, M., Page, N., Musardo, S., Coras, R., Steinbach, K., Vincenti, I., Klimek, B., Lingner, T., et al. (2018) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2018.07.049 · Cited by 195
Necrotizing Soft Tissue Infections
Stevens, D. L., Bryant, A. E., & Goldstein, E. J. (2021) · Infectious Disease Clinics of North America · doi:10.1016/j.idc.2020.10.004 · Cited by 113
Self-citationJeverica, S., Kolenc, U., Mueller-Premru, M., & Papst, L. (2017) · Anaerobe · doi:10.1016/j.anaerobe.2017.04.007 · Cited by 67
Gontjes, K. J., Gibson, K. E., Lansing, B. J., Mantey, J., Jones, K. M., Cassone, M., Wang, J., Mills, J. P., Mody, L., & Patel, P. K. (2022) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.44959 · Cited by 26
Metadata
- Authors
- Brook, I., Wexler, H. M., & Goldstein, E. J. C.
- Venue
- Clinical Microbiology Reviews
- Publisher
- American Society for Microbiology
- Published
- 2013-07
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 526-546
- ISSN
- 0893-8512 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-6618
- OpenAlex
- W2139375784
- Cited by
- 333
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 9.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.