FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2145576360> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2145576360 endingPage "230" @default.
• W2145576360 startingPage "219" @default.
• W2145576360 abstract "There is no universally accepted standard method for the isolation of Campylobacter spp. and it is considered that currently available isolation media are not yet optimal for the recovery of Campylobacter spp. from a range of sample types. Almost all methods incorporate antibiotics into the isolation media to inhibit growth of other bacteria within the sample. It is established that the incorporation of such antibiotics into isolation media will inhibit the growth of some Campylobacter spp. as well as other bacteria. The results of the use of such suboptimal isolation methods are that the isolates which 'survive' the isolation procedure will be those which: (i) are able to 'out compete' the rest of the bacteria in the sample, i.e. they are able to grow faster; (ii) are resistant to the antibiotics used in the isolation media; and (iii) are randomly selected by the laboratory technician as being a 'typical'Campylobacter spp. It is clear that such a procedure is intrinsically biased and will mean that species resistant to the antibiotics used in the media will be isolated. This introduces real doubt that the bacteria isolated are truly representative of those initially found on the sample. It is also becoming clear that Campylobacter spp. are rather difficult to isolate as pure cultures and many are in fact mixtures of more than one strain. Again this introduces great uncertainty as to the prevalence and distribution of respective species from the different sample types. This is especially true when considering isolation of Campylobacter spp. causing disease in man as there is no certainty that the selected isolate is that which was responsible for disease. The incorporation of antibiotics into the isolation media not only introduces the issue of species bias but perhaps more importantly exposes the Campylobacter spp. to a cocktail of antibiotics thereby providing the potential for them to 'switch on' antibiotic resistance mechanisms. It might be argued that this has always been the case for isolation of Campylobacter spp., however, we know that the antibiotic cocktails used in media over the last 10 years have changed and indeed there was a time when the filtration protocol which didn't use antibiotics was more widely used. As most reports in the literature do not state what methods were used to isolate Campylobacter spp. it is not possible to quantify any relationship between antibiotics used in the isolation media and susceptibility data. An approved method for Campylobacter susceptibility testing was not available until May 2002, all data generated prior to this date will have been generated using non-standard methods. As tremendous variability in the reproducibility data for Campylobacter spp. was observed during the development of the standard agar dilution susceptibility method, data generated with disk diffusion and broth microdilution methods must be considered with caution. It has been shown that, compared with the conventional agar dilution method, the E-test tends to give rise to lower minimal inhibitory concentrations (MICs) for sensitive strains and higher MICs for resistant strains. There are no recommended antibiotic breakpoint concentrations for Campylobacter spp. A breakpoint is used to separate sensitive from resistant strains of bacteria and is thus crucial to any discussion of antibiotic resistance. This discussion is further complicated by introduction of the terms microbiological and clinical breakpoints. While a microbiological breakpoint can be a useful parameter with regard to identifying resistance factors it cannot on its own be used to predict whether that bacteria will respond to treatment from an appropriate antibiotic. Predicting clinical response is a function of the clinical breakpoint which considers the pharmacokinetic profile of the antimicrobial compound, i.e. the concentration of the antimicrobial compound in the body and the MIC. The National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS) uses microbiological, pharmacokinetic and clinical data to establish breakpoints, without c and clinical data to establish breakpoints, without such considerations it is not possible to consider what is truly clinically sensitive and resistant. There are no reported studies that have systematically determined appropriate breakpoints for Campylobacter, there are data however, which relate MICs to clinical outcome. It is without dispute that microbiological resistance in Campylobacter spp. occurs as a result of mutation in the gyrA gene with single point mutations most frequently causing a four- to eightfold shift in the MIC. What is also clear is that if a high enough concentration of antimicrobial relative to MIC of the infecting organism can be achieved not only will the parent organism be killed but also the 'resistant' mutant. Considering the above and the concentrations of ciprofloxacin achieved in the gastro-intestinal tract it is not surprising that clinical cure can be demonstrated for organisms with an MIC of 32 microg ml(-1)." @default.
• W2145576360 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2145576360 creator A5090142530 @default.
• W2145576360 date "2003-03-28" @default.
• W2145576360 modified "2023-10-14" @default.
• W2145576360 title "Campylobacter and fluoroquinolones: a bias data set?" @default.
• W2145576360 cites W1491957983 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W1666867306 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W1786476049 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W1814325024 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W1929167507 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W1949158194 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W1965868566 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W1965924349 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W1967274815 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W1968981224 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W1973876328 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W1973896198 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W1980982717 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W1994001518 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2007935722 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2008827129 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2010504473 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2011754273 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2013177820 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2013344790 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2017922308 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2027986201 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2042053385 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2043805760 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2044852622 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2045195253 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2052232167 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2060675886 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2067130929 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2068339363 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2091301347 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2093350060 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2094710544 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2099770877 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2102802911 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2103301499 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2117398483 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2124319043 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2131767961 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2132848214 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2136234126 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2138984944 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2140828410 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2142689063 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2143018704 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2156786954 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2158890987 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2162198167 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2163104929 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2164679803 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2165391334 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2170599691 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2259434519 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W2287537633 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W34472227 @default.
• W2145576360 cites W4244138503 @default.
• W2145576360 doi "https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1462-2920.2003.00425.x" @default.
• W2145576360 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12662169" @default.
• W2145576360 hasPublicationYear "2003" @default.
• W2145576360 type Work @default.
• W2145576360 sameAs 2145576360 @default.
• W2145576360 citedByCount "18" @default.
• W2145576360 countsByYear W21455763602016 @default.
• W2145576360 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2145576360 hasAuthorship W2145576360A5090142530 @default.
• W2145576360 hasConcept C2775941552 @default.
• W2145576360 hasConcept C2779910956 @default.
• W2145576360 hasConcept C501593827 @default.
• W2145576360 hasConcept C523546767 @default.
• W2145576360 hasConcept C54355233 @default.
• W2145576360 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W2145576360 hasConcept C89423630 @default.
• W2145576360 hasConceptScore W2145576360C2775941552 @default.
• W2145576360 hasConceptScore W2145576360C2779910956 @default.
• W2145576360 hasConceptScore W2145576360C501593827 @default.
• W2145576360 hasConceptScore W2145576360C523546767 @default.
• W2145576360 hasConceptScore W2145576360C54355233 @default.
• W2145576360 hasConceptScore W2145576360C86803240 @default.
• W2145576360 hasConceptScore W2145576360C89423630 @default.
• W2145576360 hasIssue "4" @default.
• W2145576360 hasLocation W21455763601 @default.
• W2145576360 hasLocation W21455763602 @default.
• W2145576360 hasOpenAccess W2145576360 @default.
• W2145576360 hasPrimaryLocation W21455763601 @default.
• W2145576360 hasRelatedWork W1911163028 @default.
• W2145576360 hasRelatedWork W1976301740 @default.
• W2145576360 hasRelatedWork W2034278444 @default.
• W2145576360 hasRelatedWork W2074876949 @default.
• W2145576360 hasRelatedWork W2127226196 @default.
• W2145576360 hasRelatedWork W2145576360 @default.
• W2145576360 hasRelatedWork W2168289956 @default.
• W2145576360 hasRelatedWork W2181751254 @default.

• next