ライフサイエンスコーパス: meropenem

1 o carbapenem antibiotics (either imipenem or meropenem).

2 r on the strain with and without exposure to meropenem.

3 to amikacin, fosfomycin, and susceptible to meropenem.

4 of fosfomycin in conjunction with high-dose meropenem.

5 ycin, cefepime, piperacillin/tazobactam, and meropenem.

6 to increase in resistance of the bacteria to meropenem.

7 le in MacConkey broth containing 1 mug/ml of meropenem.

8 vents were probably or definitely related to meropenem.

9 Ala (acylenzyme) mutants with the carbapenem meropenem.

10 for polymyxin B, tigecycline, cefepime, and meropenem.

11 logue and (ii) the carbapenems, imipenem and meropenem.

12 ity with carbapenems, including imipenem and meropenem.

13 d on ImiS and its reaction with imipenem and meropenem.

14 nd a MIC screen for ertapenem, imipenem, and meropenem.

15 this results in a 16-fold increase in MIC to Meropenem.

16 inosa, in comparison with the sole use of IV meropenem.

17 ibiotics in order to reduce resistance to IV meropenem.

18 ns - ceftazidime + meropenem and aztreonam + meropenem.

19 ither eravacycline 1 mg/kg every 12 hours or meropenem 1 g every 8 hours intravenously for 4-14 days.

20 Intravenous meropenem (1 g every 8 hours) and moxifloxacin (400 mg e

21 g per kilogram of body weight once daily) or meropenem (1 g every 8 hours), with optional oral step-d

22 Interventions: Meropenem (1 g intravenously every 8 hours) or placebo w

23 plus metronidazole (500 mg) every 8 hours or meropenem (1 g) every 8 hours intravenously for 4-14 day

24 nd nosocomial SBP were randomized to receive meropenem (1 g/8 hours) plus daptomycin (6 mg/kg/day) or

25 em, 0.5%, 8%, 78%; imipenem, 1, 16, 75%; and meropenem, 1, 16, 82%.

26 ipenem, 1, 8, 69%; imipenem, 2, 16, 67%; and meropenem, 1, 32, 70%; and by nonintensive care units: D

27 aline/mouse subcutaneously) and antibiotics (meropenem 10 mg/kg intraperitoneally at 6, 24, and 48 ho

28 ptibility to piperacillin/tazobactam 94% and meropenem 100%.

29 went skin tests with imipenem/cilastatin and meropenem; 130 of them were skin-tested also with ertape

30 re nonsusceptible to chloramphenicol (5.7%), meropenem (16.6%), and cefotaxime (11.8%).

31 wed by ciprofloxacin (32.6%) and imipenem or meropenem (28.7%).

32 ility in trough concentrations (6.7-fold for meropenem, 3.8-fold for piperacillin, 10.5-fold for tazo

33 rog/ml versus 16 microg/ml); and similar for meropenem (4 micro g/ml versus < or = 1 microg/ml), cipr

34 l that, in the SFC-1 acylenzyme complex, the meropenem 6alpha-1R-hydroxyethyl group interacts with As

35 ceftazidime, 77.1%, 4 mug/ml, and 64 mug/ml; meropenem, 72.7%, 1 mug/ml, and 16 mug/ml; imipenem, 67.

36 regimens achieved target concentrations for meropenem (89%), piperacillin (83%), and vancomycin (60%

37 gecycline, and the carbapenems (imipenem and meropenem); 90.8% of Acinetobacter baumannii isolates we

38 hich was further enhanced when combined with meropenem, a common anti-Pseudomonal carbapenem antibiot

39 resistant strains in adjunctive therapy with meropenem, a standard-of-care antibiotic, confirming the

40 bactam plus metronidazole was noninferior to meropenem across all primary analysis populations.

41 bsiella pneumoniae, AMA efficiently restored meropenem activity, demonstrating that a combination of

42 dium, resulting in MICs that reflect in vivo meropenem activity.

43 The structures of apo-LdtMt5 and its meropenem adduct presented here demonstrate that, despit

44 AMA also fully restored the activity of meropenem against Enterobacteriaceae, Acinetobacter spp.

45 er, compound 23 was superior to imipenem and meropenem against highly pathogenic carbapenem-resistant

46 and potentiated activity of the carbapenem, meropenem, against a strain carrying the large, pCRE pla

47 ned meropenem and moxifloxacin compared with meropenem alone did not result in less organ failure.

48 ours; nebulized fosfomycin every 6 hours; IV meropenem alone every 8 hours; nebulized amikacin and fo

49 (8.3 points; 95% CI, 7.8-8.8 points) and the meropenem alone group (7.9 points; 95% CI, 7.5-8.4 point

50 and moxifloxacin (400 mg every 24 hours) or meropenem alone.

51 ere tested for their capability to hydrolyze Meropenem, an FDA-approved carbapenem drug.

52 firmed necrotizing pancreatitis: 50 received meropenem and 50 received placebo.

53 In particular, IV meropenem and amikacin and fosfomycin + IV meropenem gro

54 efficacy versus both strains - ceftazidime + meropenem and aztreonam + meropenem.

55 The combination of meropenem and ciprofloxacin was predominantly additive o

56 The combinations meropenem and ciprofloxacin, meropenem and teicoplanin,

57 Meropenem and clavulanate are Food and Drug Administrati

58 ivity toward multiple antibiotics, including meropenem and doxycycline, highlighting ppiB inhibition

59 The sensitivity and specificity of meropenem and ertapenem for carbapenemase activity among

60 Mandatory ID consultation and PPRF for meropenem and imipenem beyond 72 hours resulted in a sig

61 infectious disease (ID) consultation for all meropenem and imipenem courses > 72 hours.

62 itute (CLSI) lowered the MIC breakpoints for meropenem and imipenem from 4 mg/liter to 1 mg/liter for

63 e sensitive indicator of KPC resistance than meropenem and imipenem independently of the method used.

64 itiation, there was a significant decline in meropenem and imipenem initiation ("first starts") in th

65 Meropenem and imipenem provided high probabilities of ac

66 Meropenem and imipenem use remained steady until the int

67 Recovery in bottles with meropenem and imipenem was more frequently observed in B

68 A dose-ranging study with meropenem and levofloxacin alone and in combination agai

69 Meropenem and levofloxacin penetrations into epithelial

70 Meropenem and levofloxacin were administered to partiall

71 with severe sepsis, treatment with combined meropenem and moxifloxacin compared with meropenem alone

72 nt difference in mean SOFA score between the meropenem and moxifloxacin group (8.3 points; 95% CI, 7.

73 in 26% (13 of 50) and 20% (10 of 50) of the meropenem and placebo groups, respectively (P = 0.476).

74 re (MacConkey broth containing 1 mg/liter of meropenem and subcultured to a MacConkey agar plate with

75 he combinations meropenem and ciprofloxacin, meropenem and teicoplanin, moxifloxacin and teicoplanin,

76 OXA-24/40 with close to the same affinity as meropenem and undergoes a complete catalytic hydrolysis

77 The patient was treated empirically with meropenem and vancomycin, and the fever resolved within

78 13 for isolates that were not susceptible to meropenem and/or imipenem.

79 of beta-lactams (ampicillin, cefotaxime, and meropenem) and at two different temperatures (25 degrees

80 muM for moxifloxacin, 43.6 +/- 10.7 muM for meropenem, and 7.1 +/- 0.6 muM for piperacillin) and in

81 sivist-led model of care, the empiric use of meropenem, and adjunctive treatment with granulocyte col

82 introduction of an intensivist-led service, meropenem, and adjuvant granulocyte colony-stimulating f

83 rium acnes ophthalmic isolates to ertapenem, meropenem, and cefepime by utilizing the Etest.

84 d 1 microg/ml to 12 microg/ml for ertapenem, meropenem, and cefepime, respectively.

85 obacter baumannii by BOCILLIN FL, aztreonam, meropenem, and ceftazidime.

86 ssfully treated with vancomycin, tobramycin, meropenem, and clindamycin is described.

87 next showed that the carbapenems (imipenem, meropenem, and doripenem) form long-lived acyl-enzyme in

88 tient was shown to be resistant to imipenem, meropenem, and ertapenem by disk diffusion susceptibilit

89 nd/or OXA carbapenemases, by using imipenem, meropenem, and ertapenem with LC-MS/MS assays.

90 hat other beta-lactams, such as cephalothin, meropenem, and penicillin G, proceed through an electron

91 sis and septic shock, that is, moxifloxacin, meropenem, and piperacillin in aqueous solution and huma

92 azolin, ciprofloxacin, colistin, gentamicin, meropenem, and tetracycline in comparison to the results

93 ent bolus dosing of piperacillin-tazobactam, meropenem, and ticarcillin-clavulanate conducted in 5 in

94 henotypes against ampicillin, ciprofloxacin, meropenem, and vancomycin.

95 Carbapenems such as meropenem are being investigated for their potential the

96 nine in the plazomicin arm compared with the meropenem arm.

97 vel for the experimental evidence indicating meropenem as a compound strongly affected by MexB contra

98 at 1000 mg every 8 h 3-h infusion, 77%, 83%; meropenem at 2000 mg every 8 hrs 3-hr infusion, 87%, 94%

99 00 mg every 6 hrs 0.5-hr infusion, 62%, 69%; meropenem at 500 mg every 6 hrs 0.5-hr infusion, 67%, 76

100 ntamicin/meropenem or ceftazidime/gentamicin/meropenem) at different dosages were explored.

101 a were proposed for cefotaxime, ceftriaxone, meropenem, azithromycin, and minocycline.

102 Fluorescein-meropenem binds both penicillin-binding proteins and bet

103 veral of our new carbapenems are superior to meropenem both with respect to the efficiency of in vitr

104 ngs that also identified two populations for meropenem bound in SHV-1: one with the acyl CO group in

105 ompared to the structure of the same ring in meropenem bound to OXA-13.

106 a coli clinical isolate that is sensitive to meropenem but resistant to ertapenem to explore transcri

107 is study, we show the utility of fluorescein-meropenem by using it to detect mutants of OXA-24/40 tha

108 h intravenous infusion every 8 h) or 1000 mg meropenem (by 30-min intravenous infusion every 8 h) for

109 ly sampled preterm infants demonstrates that meropenem, cefotaxime and ticarcillin-clavulanate are as

110 al agents was tested: ceftazidime, imipenem, meropenem, ceftazidime-avibactam, and imipenem-relebacta

111 ntly inactivate achievable concentrations of meropenem, ceftolozane-tazobactam, and ceftazidime-aviba

112 idpoint, or trough plasma concentrations for meropenem, ceftolozane-tazobactam, and ceftazidime-aviba

113 nt in blood culture (BC) bottles in removing meropenem, ceftolozane-tazobactam, and ceftazidime-aviba

114 Teicoplanin combined with meropenem, ciprofloxacin, or moxifloxacin was also predo

115 The meropenem/ciprofloxacin combination gave the lowest mean

116 Recently, meropenem-clavulanate was shown to be effective against

117 comparing colistin monotherapy with colistin-meropenem combination for the treatment of severe infect

118 comparing colistin monotherapy with colistin-meropenem combination for the treatment of severe infect

119 6, 9.4%) vs. patients randomized to colistin-meropenem combination therapy (12/108, 11.1%), p=0.669.

120 9.4%) versus patients randomized to colistin-meropenem combination therapy (12/108, 11.1%; P = .669).

121 were higher in those randomized to colistin-meropenem combination therapy compared to colistin monot

122 d with a better outcome compared to colistin-meropenem combination therapy.

123 infections treated with colistin or colistin-meropenem combination.

124 e-dimensional structure of the covalent BlaC-meropenem covalent complex at 1.8 angstrom resolution.

125 of a MacConkey agar plate on which a 10-mug meropenem disk was placed and plating on MacConkey agar

126 ured to a MacConkey agar plate with a 10-mug meropenem disk) and for sequencing of DNA obtained from

127 mbination of amikacin and fosfomycin with IV meropenem does not increase antipseudomonal pulmonary ti

128 The imipenem, meropenem, doripenem, and ertapenem MIC50 values were 4,

129 ted through 3 and 30 days following the last meropenem dose, respectively.

130 d repurposed (eg, linezolid, clofazimine, or meropenem) drugs and guided by genotypic and phenotypic

131 riconazole due to the Aspergillus flavus and meropenem due to the Pseudomonas aeruginosa was initiate

132 fosfomycin, and amikacin and fosfomycin + IV meropenem effectively reduced P. aeruginosa in tracheal

133 usceptibility to aztreonam, ceftazidime, and meropenem; Enterobacteriaceae were also tested against e

134 ikacin and fosfomycin every 6 hours, with IV meropenem every 8 hours.

135 ent profile for plazomicin was comparable to meropenem except for an increased additional rise in ser

136 or patients receiving cefepime compared with meropenem for invasive infections caused by organisms ex

137 e of reference BMD or Etest for cefepime and meropenem for susceptibility testing of KPC-producing K.

138 Once-daily plazomicin was noninferior to meropenem for the treatment of complicated UTIs and acut

139 bacterial drug ceftolozane-tazobactam versus meropenem for treatment of Gram-negative nosocomial pneu

140 otics that have varying mechanisms of action-meropenem, gentamicin, and ceftazidime-highlighting the

141 oup, compared with 211 (78.1%) of 270 in the meropenem group (difference -0.7% [95% CI -7.9 to 6.4]).

142 ared with 270 (73.0%) of 370 patients in the meropenem group (difference -4.2% [95% CI -10.8 to 2.5])

143 up and in 91.4% (180 of 197 patients) in the meropenem group (difference, -3.4 percentage points; 95%

144 ibactam group versus 299 (74%) of 403 in the meropenem group (safety population), and were mostly mil

145 all mortality rate was 20% (10 of 50) in the meropenem group and 18% (9 of 50) in the placebo group (

146 eveloped in 18% (9 of 50) of patients in the meropenem group compared with 12% (6 of 50) in the place

147 ozane-tazobactam group and 92 (25.3%) in the meropenem group had died (weighted treatment difference

148 patients in the plazomicin group than in the meropenem group had microbiologic recurrence (3.7% vs. 8

149 olozane-tazobactam group and two (1%) in the meropenem group had serious treatment-related adverse ev

150 Resistance to meropenem increased in IV meropenem group versus amikacin and fosfomycin + meropen

151 lozane-tazobactam group and 194 (53%) in the meropenem group were clinically cured (weighted treatmen

152 patients in the plazomicin group than in the meropenem group were found to have microbiologic eradica

153 avibactam group and 54 (13%) patients in the meropenem group.

154 ceftolozane-tazobactam group and 364 to the meropenem group.

155 s in the plazomicin group and in 4.0% in the meropenem group.

156 e-tazobactam group and 27 (8%) of 359 in the meropenem group.

157 V meropenem and amikacin and fosfomycin + IV meropenem groups presented lower P. aeruginosa concentra

158 eftolozane/tazobactam plus metronidazole and meropenem groups, respectively, and 100% (13/13) and 72.

159 6) and 84.6% (11/13) in the eravacycline and meropenem groups, respectively.

160 According to our results, meropenem has a higher affinity to the distal binding po

161 1 beta-lactamase enzyme and the carbapenems, meropenem, imipenem, and ertapenem, have been studied by

162 peak, midpoint, and trough concentrations of meropenem, imipenem, cefepime, cefazolin, levofloxacin,

163 li and Klebsiella pneumoniae when exposed to meropenem, imipenem, cefepime, cefazolin, levofloxacin,

164 Meropenem, imipenem, cefepime, ceftazidime (2 g every 8

165 h Enterobacteriaceae infections treated with meropenem, imipenem, or doripenem.

166 following antimicrobials at standard doses: meropenem, imipenem-cilastatin, ceftazidime, cefepime, p

167 bactam plus metronidazole were compared with meropenem in 1066 men and women with complicated intra-a

168 ntilator-associated pneumonia, compared with meropenem in a multinational, phase 3, double-blind, non

169 results, in vivo studies using ertapenem and meropenem in a rabbit model of P. acnes endophthalmitis

170 bactam plus metronidazole was noninferior to meropenem in adult patients with cIAI, including infecti

171 eatment with eravacycline was noninferior to meropenem in adult patients with cIAI, including infecti

172 emonstrated that hydrolytic decomposition of meropenem in living Escherichia coli cells carrying New

173 tolozane-tazobactam was thus non-inferior to meropenem in terms of both 28-day all-cause mortality an

174 ceftazidime-avibactam plus metronidazole to meropenem in the microbiologically modified intention-to

175 bactam plus metronidazole was noninferior to meropenem in the primary (83.0% [323/389] vs 87.3% [364/

176 Eravacycline was noninferior to meropenem in the primary endpoint (177/195 [90.8%] vs 18

177 bactam plus metronidazole was noninferior to meropenem in the treatment of complicated intra-abdomina

178 to show the noninferiority of plazomicin to meropenem in the treatment of complicated UTIs, includin

179 N: Ceftazidime-avibactam was non-inferior to meropenem in the treatment of nosocomial pneumonia.

180 cetic acid (EDTA), inhibit the hydrolysis of meropenem in vivo.

181 to determine the safety and effectiveness of meropenem in young infants with suspected or complicated

182 Cefepime and meropenem increased CDI risk relative to piperacillin/ta

183 Resistance to meropenem increased in IV meropenem group versus amikaci

184 e D,D-carboxypeptidase DacB2 and showed that meropenem indeed directly inhibits this enzyme by formin

185 e in the tetrapeptide pools, suggesting that meropenem inhibits both a D,D-carboxypeptidase and an L,

186 c decomposition of the carbapenem antibiotic meropenem inside Escherichia coli cells expressing New D

187 ive either 3 g ceftolozane-tazobactam or 1 g meropenem intravenously every 8 h for 8-14 days.

188 Meropenem is a broad-spectrum antimicrobial with excelle

189 Meropenem is an extremely slow substrate for BlaC and ex

190 ts were determined to be possibly related to meropenem (isolated ileal perforation and an episode of

191 erved [minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC(meropenem)) less than 1 microgram per milliliter], and s

192 er (ZD) criteria for ertapenem (<=27 mm) and meropenem (<=32 mm) result in high rates of false positi

193 re endemic, testing for nonsusceptibility to meropenem may provide improved accuracy in identifying t

194 racillin-tazobactam (PT), cefepime (CE), and meropenem (ME).

195 f two zwitterionic carbapenems, imipenem and meropenem, measured using liposome permeation assays and

196 sing ceftriaxone (CRO), ertapenem (ETP), and meropenem (MEM) and demonstrate agreement with gold-stan

197 tions]) and the beta-lactams imipenem (IPM), meropenem (MEM), ertapenem (ERT), and ceftazidime (CAZ).

198 Imipenem (IPM), meropenem (MEM), ertapenem (ERT), and doripenem (DOR) we

199 combination: PTZ/VAN, cefepime (CEF)/VAN, or meropenem (MER)/VAN.

200 ts, and the majority of infants treated with meropenem met the definition of therapeutic success.

201 d MicroScan methods to accurately define the meropenem MIC and categorical interpretation of suscepti

202 Meropenem MIC results and categorical interpretations fo

203 resistant to imipenem (MIC, >256 mug/ml) and meropenem (MIC, 128 mug/ml) and belonged to ST3835.

204 non-CP-CRE isolates were more likely to have meropenem MICs </=1 microg/mL (P value < .001).

205 Meropenem MICs were determined in triplicate for each lo

206 Up to 8-fold differences in meropenem MICs were observed between the commercial lots

207 e association of piperacillin/tazobactam and meropenem minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and bet

208 CP-CRE isolates were more likely to have meropenem minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) >/=16

209 stant infections was comparable to that with meropenem (mMITT population, 83.0% and 85.9%, respective

210 After clinical deterioration using meropenem monotherapy, treatment success was achieved af

211 Susceptibility to ceftazidime and meropenem occurred in approximately 70% of the isolates.

212 across antibiotics combinations (gentamicin/meropenem or ceftazidime/gentamicin/meropenem) at differ

213 When meropenem or ertapenem was reacted with SHV-1 in solutio

214 nteractors of Oxa-23 demonstrates changes in meropenem or imipenem sensitivity in strain AB5075.

215 fection empirically treated with imipenem or meropenem (OR, 0.35 [95% CI, .14-.87]).

216 class currently being prescribed (cefepime, meropenem, or piperacillin-tazobactam) or had a positive

217 penem group versus amikacin and fosfomycin + meropenem (p = 0.004).

218 ERY), gatifloxacin, levofloxacin, linezolid, meropenem, penicillin (PEN), tetracycline (TET), trimeth

219 taxime, ceftriaxone, doxycycline, linezolid, meropenem, penicillin, rifampin, tetracycline, trimethop

220 articles describing the pharmacokinetics of meropenem, piperacillin, and vancomycin in critically il

221 of the patient groups involved in studies of meropenem, piperacillin, and vancomycin were 55.3, 60.3,

222 Meropenem, piperacillin, and voriconazole were cleared b

223 sition of five commonly used antimicrobials (meropenem, piperacillin, liposomal amphotericin B, caspo

224 ncrease, respectively), while treatment with meropenem, piperacillin-tazobactam, and oral ciprofloxac

225 Other antibiotics, such as meropenem, piperacillin/tazobactam, and cefuroxime, were

226 When compared with meropenem, plazomicin was not inferior.

227 The combination of meropenem plus daptomycin is more effective than ceftazi

228 The aim of our study was to compare meropenem plus daptomycin versus ceftazidime in the trea

229 The combination of meropenem plus daptomycin was significantly more effecti

230 Meropenem plus levofloxacin treatment was shown to be a

231 The combination of meropenem plus levofloxacin was synergistic, producing g

232 tified resistance to cefepime, resistance to meropenem, presence of multidrug resistance, nonabdomina

233 openem resistance was 94.3% overall, and for meropenem ranged from 70 to 100% across U.S. census regi

234 revalence of OXA co-harboring ESBLs suggests meropenem remains the preferred choice for definitive tr

235 We were able to predict the Meropenem resistance of these bacteria on the basis of t

236 itivity of KPC or NDM to predict imipenem or meropenem resistance was 94.3% overall, and for meropene

237 CR revealed that imipenem resistance but not meropenem resistance was associated with the presence of

238 To investigate phenotypic inducibility of meropenem resistance, short read sequencing was performe

239 ariables, lung histology, and development of meropenem resistance.

240 onding change from a low level to high level meropenem resistant phenotype.

241 the presence of bla(KPC) in an additional 20 meropenem-resistant isolates from 16 patients.

242 Seven imipenem-resistant and five meropenem-resistant isolates of Enterobacteriaceae and 4

243 acteriaceae and 43 imipenem-resistant and 21 meropenem-resistant isolates of P. aeruginosa were ident

244 ) in all of the reference strains, in 6 of 7 meropenem-resistant isolates, and in 0 of 62 meropenem-s

245 onfirm the presence of bla(KPC) genes in any meropenem-resistant Klebsiella spp.

246 activity, but it does reduce development of meropenem-resistant P. aeruginosa, in comparison with th

247 ceftazidime-avibactam plus metronidazole and meropenem, respectively, were as follows: mMITT populati

248 susceptible, intermediate, and resistant to meropenem, respectively.

249 actamase inhibitor clavulanate together with meropenem resulted in rapid, polar, cell lysis releasing

250 e enzyme, and its reaction with imipenem and meropenem revealed biphasic fluorescence time courses wi

251 SKIE determinations with meropenem revealed large SKIEs on both the acylation and

252 ent therapy and extracorporeal clearance for meropenem (rs = 0.43; p = 0.12), piperacillin (rs = 0.77

253 When strain BQ11 was exposed to meropenem, selective pressure drove amplification of the

254 Following a meropenem shortage, we implemented a post-prescription r

255 The crystal structure of NDM-1 bound to meropenem shows for the first time the molecular details

256 of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2C19 and CYP3A4 by meropenem, suggesting that during meropenem treatment, n

257 were inoculated with one of two isolates (1 meropenem susceptible and 1 resistant), followed by fres

258 meropenem-resistant isolates, and in 0 of 62 meropenem-susceptible clinical isolates.

259 outcomes for patients receiving cefepime or meropenem therapy were compared.

260 or ceftazidime/gentamicin were combined with meropenem to treat carbapenem-resistant Escherichia coli

261 loxacin, gentamicin, imipenem, levofloxacin, meropenem, tobramycin, and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole

262 hese results suggest that the rapid lysis of meropenem-treated cells is the result of synergistically

263 the gene expression response to ertapenem or meropenem treatment and found significant expression cha

264 Meropenem treatment was accompanied by a dramatic accumu

265 CYP3A4 by meropenem, suggesting that during meropenem treatment, narrow therapeutic index drugs meta

266 rence between these two groups undergoing IV meropenem treatment.

267 es in the binding properties of imipenem and meropenem, two potent antibiotics of the carbapenem fami

268 urther validated by determining the relative meropenem uptake by Pseudomonas aeruginosa wild-type ver

269 Meropenem-vaborbactam (MEV) is a novel carbapenem-beta-l

270 tient developed a recurrent infection due to meropenem-vaborbactam non-susceptible, ompK36 porin muta

271 mely, ceftazidime-avibactam, plazomicin, and meropenem-vaborbactam) have been approved by regulatory

272 tient developed a recurrent infection due to meropenem-vaborbactam-nonsusceptible, ompK36 porin mutan

273 teriaceae (CRE) infections were treated with meropenem-vaborbactam.

274 erobacteriaceae infections were treated with meropenem-vaborbactam.

275 Ceftazidime/avibactam and meropenem/vaborbactam are changing the management of inv

276 ICs of antibiotics (ceftazidime, gentamicin, meropenem, vancomycin and linezolid), interaction effect

277 , Piperacillin/Tazobactam (n = 52, P = .01), Meropenem/Vancomycin (n = 16, P = .003), Ceftazidime (n

278 tile range) trough concentrations (mg/L) for meropenem was 12.1 (7.8-18.4), 105.0 (74.4-204.0)/3.8 (3

279 d with piperacillin/tazobactam compared with meropenem was 9% (95% CI 3% - 15%) and 8% (95% CI 2% - 1

280 iconazole dose reductions whenever high-dose meropenem was added.

281 a combination of tigecycline, colistin, and meropenem was associated with lower mortality (OR: 0.11;

282 When meropenem was combined with the beta-lactamase inhibitor

283 ibiotic therapy comprising metronidazole and meropenem was partly beneficial in improving the patient

284 In both systems, meropenem was removed to a greater degree than were ceft

285 Bacterial resistant to levofloxacin and meropenem was seen in the control arm.

286 Meropenem was well tolerated in this cohort of criticall

287 A rigid carbapenem (meropenem) was most affected by the Asn276Asp substituti

288 By reacting fluorescein isothiocyanate with meropenem, we have prepared a carbapenem-based fluoresce

289 s for piperacillin/tazobactam, cefepime, and meropenem were 1.50 (95% CI: 1.43-1.54), 1.00 (0.95-1.05

290 es of Trypticase soy broth plus ertapenem or meropenem were 78% and 47%, respectively.

291 , and vancomycin; minocycline, imipenem, and meropenem were also highly active (>92% susceptibility).

292 llin-tazobactam, ticarcillin-clavulanate, or meropenem were randomized to receive the prescribed anti

293 bramycin, and only one major (M) error, with meropenem, when DD results were compared with BMD result

294 1% between penicillins and both imipenem and meropenem, whereas a single study found a cross-reactivi

295 ty between penicillins and both imipenem and meropenem, while a single study found a 5.5% rate of cro

296 Plazomicin was noninferior to meropenem with respect to the primary efficacy end point

297 eta-lactams of the carbapenem class, such as meropenem, with clavulanate, a beta-lactamase inhibitor,

298 2 microg/ml) were identified as part of the Meropenem Yearly Susceptibility Test Information Collect

299 -positive organisms treated with cefepime or meropenem yielded 32 well-balanced patient pairs with no

300 Reducing the ertapenem and meropenem ZDs to <=25 mm improved specificity to 83%, de