Pharmacodynamic evaluation of piperacillin/tazobactam versus meropenem against extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing and non-producing Escherichia coli clinical isolates in a hollow-fibre infection model.

Abstract

BackgroundUrosepsis caused by extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Escherichia coli is increasing worldwide. Carbapenems are commonly recommended for the treatment of ESBL infections; however, to minimize the emergence of carbapenem resistance, interest in alternative treatments has heightened.ObjectivesThis study compared pharmacodynamics of piperacillin/tazobactam versus meropenem against ESBL-producing and non-producing E. coli clinical isolates.Methods E. coli isolates, obtained from national reference laboratory in Bangladesh, were characterized by phenotypic tests, WGS, susceptibility tests and mutant frequency analysis. Three ESBL-producing and two non-producing E. coli were exposed to piperacillin/tazobactam (4.5 g, every 6 h and every 8 h, 30 min infusion) and meropenem (1 g, every 8 h, 30 min infusion) in a hollow-fibre infection model over 7 days.ResultsPiperacillin/tazobactam regimens attained ∼4–5 log10 cfu/mL bacterial killing within 24 h and prevented resistance emergence over the experiment against ESBL-producing and non-producing E. coli. However, compared with 8 hourly meropenem, the 6 hourly piperacillin/tazobactam attained ∼1 log10 lower bacterial kill against one of three ESBL-producing E. coli (CTAP#173) but comparable killing for the other two ESBL-producing (CTAP#168 and CTAP#169) and two non-producing E. coli (CTAP#179 and CTAP#180). The 6 hourly piperacillin/tazobactam regimen attained ∼1 log10 greater bacterial kill compared with the 8 hourly regimen against CTAP#168 and CTAP#179 at 24 h.ConclusionsOur study suggests piperacillin/tazobactam may be a potential alternative to carbapenems to treat urosepsis caused by ESBL-producing E. coli, although clinical trials with robust design are needed to confirm non-inferiority of outcome.