The Susceptibility Evaluation of Multiresistant Gram-Negative Bacilli to Meropenem and Imipenem


1 Health Research center, Baqiyatallah University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

2 Research Center of references laboratories of Iran, Tehran, Iran

3 Research Center of Molecular Biology, Baqiyatal-lah University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

4 Chemical Injuries Research Center, Baqiyatallah University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran


Introduction: Nosocomial infections are responsible for the much of the morbidity and mortality found in hospitals. The present study was conducted on 70 bacterial strains isolated from hospitalized patients in various medical units of Baqiyatallah Hospital in Tehran, Iran during a period of 12 months from; March to February 2009.

Methods: The bacterial sensitivity for meropenem and imipenem was evaluated using the E-test and explanations of the MIC values. All patients were included in this study that had been hospitalized with no signs and symptoms of infection within the first 48 hours of hospitalization and began presenting signs and symptoms of infection after 48 hours of hospitalization.

Results: Resistance to meropenem and imipenem was confirmed with E-test (AB Biodisk, Sweden) and disc diffusion methods. Meropenem and imipenem were active against 61 (64.2%) and 62(65.2%) strains, respectively, of the 95 ESBL positive strains.

Conclusion: The activity of meropenem or imipenem against gram negative ESBL-positive bacilli is decreasing rapidly but even so these antibiotics are effective against nosocomial multiresistant organisms.


  1. Nijssen S, Florijn A, Bonten MJ, Schmitz FJ, Verhoef J, Fluit AC. Beta-lactam susceptibilities and prevalence of ESBL-producing isolates among more than 5000 European Enterobacteriaceae isolates. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2004;24(6):585–91. PubMed PMID: 15555882
  2. Bush K. New h-lactamases in gram-negative bacteria: diversity and impact on the selection of antimicrobial therapy. Clin Infect Dis. 2001;32(7):1085–9. PubMed PMID: 11264037
  3. Weber DJ, Raasch R, Rutala WA. Nosocomial infections in the ICU. The growing importance of antibiotic-resistance pathogens. Chest. 1999;115(3 Suppl):34S–41S. PubMed PMID: 10084458
  4. Patzer JA, DzierË™zanowska D, Alicja Pawi´nska A, Turner PJ. High activity of meropenem against Gram-negative bacteria from a paediatric Intensive Care Unit, 2001–2005. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2007;29(3):285–8. PubMed PMID: 17257814
  5. Jones RN, Kehrberg EN, Erwin ME, Anderson SC. Prevalence of important pathogens and antimicrobial activity of parenteral drugs at numerous medical centers in the United States, I. Study on the threat of emerging resistances: real or perceived? Fluoroquinolone resistance surveillance group. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis.1994;19(4):203–15. PubMed PMID: 7851083
  6. Bekir S. Kocazeybek a, et al. Short communication Use of Etests with carbapenems for Gram-negative rods producing β-lactamases, International Journal   of Antimicrobial Agents 19 (2002) 159–162 .
  7. Garau J, Blanquer J, Cobo L, Corcia S, Daquerre M, de Latorre FJ, et al. Prospective, randomised, multicentre study of meropenem versus imipenem/cilastatin as ampiric monotherapy in severe nosocomial infections. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1997;16(11):789–96. PubMed PMID: 9447899
  8. Colardyn F, Faulkner KL. Intravenous meropenem versus imipenem/cilastatin in the treatment of serious bacterial infections in hospitalized patients. Meropenem serious infection study group. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1996;38(3):523–37. PubMed PMID: 8889726
  9. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standard (2003) Performance Standard for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. 12th Information Supplement, M100-S14. Wayne (PA): National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standard; 2003.
  10. Bradford PA. Extended-spectrum beta-lactamases in the 21st century: characterization, epidemiology, and detection of this important resistance threat. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2001;14(4): 933–51. PubMed PMID: 11585791
  11. Kanellakopoulou K, Giamarellou H, Papadothomakos P, Tsipras H, Chloroyiannis J, Theakou R, et al. Meropenem versus imipenem/cilastatin in the treatment of intraabdominal infections requiring surgery. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 1993;12(6):449–53. PubMed PMID: 8859165
  12. Brismar B, Malmborg AS, Tunevall G, Lindgren V, Bregman L, Mentzing LO, et al. Meropenem versus imipenem/cilastatin in the treatment of intra-abdominal infections. J Antimicrob Chemother 1995;35(1):139–48. PubMed PMID: 7768761
  13. Geroulanos SJ. Meropenem versus imipenem/cilastatin in intra-abdominal infections requiring surgery. Meropenem study group. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1995;36(Suppl A):191–205. PubMed PMID: 5843495
  14. Glupczynski Y, Delmee M, Goossens H, Struelens M, Belgian Multicenter ICU Study Group. Distribution and prevalence of antimicrobial resistance among gram-negative isolates in intensive care units (ICU) in Belgian hospitals between 1996 and 1999. Acta Clin Belg. 2001;56(5):297–306. PubMed PMID: 11770225
  15. Patzer J, Dzierzanowska D, Turner P. Susceptibility patterns of Gramnegative bacteria from a Polish intensive care unit, 1997–2000. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2002;19(5):431–4. PubMed PMID: 12007852
  16. Zanetti G, Harbarth SJ, Trampuz A, Ganeo M, Mosimann F, Chautemps R, et al. Meropenem (1.5 g/day) is as effective as imipenem/cilastatin (2 g/day) for the treatment of moderately severe intra-abdominal infections. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 1999;11(2):107–13. PubMed PMID: 10221413
  17. Kucukates E. Antimicrobial resistance among Gram-negative bacteria isolated from intensive care units in a Cardiology Institute in Istanbul Turkey. Jpn J Infect Dis. 2005;58(4):228–31. PubMed PMID: 16116256
  18. Koseoglu O, Kocagoz S, Gur D, Akova M. Nosocomial bloodstream infections in a Turkish university hospital: study of Gram-negative bacilli and their sensitivity patterns. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2006;17(6):477–81. PubMed PMID: 11397618
  19. Tan TY, Hos LY, Koh TH, Ng LS, Tee NW, Krishnan P, et al.Antibiotic Resistance in Gram-negative Bacilli: a Singapore perspective. Ann Acad Med Singapore. 2008; 37(10):819-25. PubMed PMID: 19037514
  20. Durmaz G, Aydinli A, Yildiz U, Akgu¨n Y. The effect of meropenem and imipenem against Gram negative bacteria which are resistant to aminoglycoside and are positive for wide spectrum beta lactamases. Infection. 1997;11:19–22.
  21. Koc¸ NA, Evrensel N, Koc¸ RK. The effects of meropenem and imipenem on Gram negative bacillus isolated from the intensive care units. Infection. 1997;11:119–21.
  22. Iaconis JP, Pitkin DH, Sheikh W, Nadler HL. Comparison of antibacterial activities of meropenem and six other antimicrobials against Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates from North American studies and clinical trials. Clin Infect Dis. 1997;24(Suppl 2):S191–6. PubMed PMID: 9126693
  23. Livermore DM. Acquired carbapenemases. J Antimicrob Chemother 1997; 39(6):673-6. PubMed PMID: 9222034
  24. Chen HY, Yuan M, Livermore DM. Mechanisms of resistance to beta-lactam antibiotics amongst Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates collected in UK in 1993. J Med Microbiol. 1995;43(4):300–9. PubMed PMID: 7562993
  25. Livermore DM. Bacterial resistance to carbapenems. In: Jungkind DL, editor. Antimicrobial resistance: a crisis in health care. New York: Plenum Press, 1995:25.
  26. Hadadi A1, Rasoulinejad M, Maleki Z, Yonesian M, Shirani A, Kourorian Z. Antimicrobial resistance pattern of Gram-negative bacilli of nosocomial origin at 2 university hospitals in Iran.Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2008;60(3):301–5. PubMed PMID: 18036759
  27. Hawser S, Hoban D, Bouchillon S, Badal R. Antimicrobial susceptibility of intra-abdominal Gram-negative bacilli from Europe: SMART Europe 2008. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis, published online 16 oct 2010.
  28. Owlia P, Azimi L, Gholami A, Asghari B, Lari AR. ESBL- and MBL-mediated resistance in Acinetobacter baumannii: a global threat to burn patients. Infez Med. 2012;20(3):182-7. PubMed PMID: 22992558