Bibliography / Thesis (MMed (Pathology. Medical Microbiology))--University of Stellenbosch, 2011. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Acinetobacter baumannii has emerged as one of the most troublesome nosocomial pathogens globally. This organism causes infections that are often extremely difficult to treat because of the widespread resistance to the major antibiotic groups. Colonization or infection with multidrugresistant A. baumannii is associated with the following risk factors: prolonged hospital stay, admission to an intensive care unit (ICU), mechanical ventilation, and exposure to broad spectrum antibiotics, recent surgery, invasive procedures, and severe underlying disease. A. baumannii has been isolated as part of the skin flora, mostly in moist regions such as axillae, groin and toe webs. It has also been isolated from the oral cavity and respiratory tract of healthy adults. Debilitated hospitalized patients have a high rate of colonization, especially during nosocomial Acinetobacter outbreaks. This organism is an opportunistic pathogen as it contains few virulence factors. Clinical manifestations of A. baumannii include nosocomial pneumonia, nosocomial bloodstream infections, traumatic battlefield and other wound infections, urinary tract infections, and post-neurological surgery meningitis. Fulminant community-acquired pneumonia has recently been reported, indicating that this organism can be highly pathogenic. The number of multidrug-resistant A. baumannii strains has been increasing worldwide in the past few years. Therefore the selection of empirical antibiotic treatment is very challenging. Antibiotic combinations are used mostly as empirical therapy in critically ill patients. One rationale for the use of combination therapy is to achieve synergy between agents. The checkerboard and time-kill methods are two traditional methods that have been used for synergy testing. These methods are labor intensive, cumbersome, costly, and time consuming. The E-test overlay method is a modification of the E-test method to determine synergy between the different antibiotics. This method is easy to perform, flexible and time efficient. The aim of this study was to assess the in vitro activity of different combinations of colistin, rifampicin, imipenem, and tobramycin against selected clinical strains of A. baumannii using the checkerboard and the E-test synergy methods. The MICs obtained with the E-test and broth microdilution method were compared. The results of the disk diffusion for imipenem and tobramycin as tested in the routine microbiology laboratory were presented for comparison. Overall good reproducibility was obtained with all three methods of sensitivity testing. The agreement of MICs between the broth dilution and E-test methods was good with not more than two dilution differences in MIC values for all isolates, except one in which the rifampicin E-test MIC differed with three dilutions from the MIC obtained with the microdilution method. However, the categorical agreement between the methods for rifampicin was poor. Although MICs did not differ with more than two dilutions in most cases, many major errors occurred because the MICs clustered around the breakpoints. The combinations of colistin + rifampicin, colistin + imipenem, colistin + tobramycin, rifampicin + tobramycin, and imipenem + tobramycin all showed indifferent or additive results by the E-test method. No results indicating synergy were obtained for all the above-mentioned combinations. There was one result indicating antagonistic effect for the combination of colistin + tobramycin. The results of the checkerboard method showed results indicating synergy in four of the six isolates for which the combination of colistin and rifampicin was tested. The other two isolates showed indifferent/additive results. All the other combinations showed indifferent/additive results for all isolates except isolate 30 (col + tob) and isolate 25 (rif + tob) which showed synergism. No antagonistic results were observed by the checkerboard method. When the results obtained with the E-test and checkerboard methods were compared, it was noted that for most antibiotic combinations an indifferent/additive result was obtained. However, for the colistin + rifampicin combination, the checkerboard method showed synergism for 4 of 6 isolates, whereas the E-test method showed indifference and an additive result in one. For the rifampicin + tobramycin, and colistin + tobramycin combinations, synergism was also shown with the checkerboard method in one isolate for each combination. The E-test method however showed an indifferent and additive result respectively. . The E-test method was found to be a rapid, reproducible, easy-to-perform, and flexible method to determine synergistic antibiotic activity. This study was however limited by low numbers of isolates. This might explain why no synergistic results were obtained with the E-test method and few synergistic results with the checkerboard method. Genotypic analysis using pulse-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) may be considered in future studies to determine relatedness of the isolates which will facilitate the selection of different strains for synergy testing. Furthermore, clinical studies are needed to establish whether in vitro synergy testing is useful in the clinical setting and whether the results of synergy testing will have any bearing on the clinical outcome of patients infected with multidrug resistant A. baumannii. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Acinetobacter baumannii het wêreldwyd as een van die mees problematiese nosokomiale patogene verskyn. Hierdie organisme veroorsaak infeksies wat dikwels baie moeilik is om te behandel weens wydverspreide weerstandigheid teen major antibiotikagroepe. Kolonisasie of infeksie met multi-weerstandige A. baumannii word geassosieer met die volgende riskofaktore: verlengde hospitaalverblyf, toelating tot ‘n intensiewe sorgeenheid (ICU), meganiese ventilasie, blootstelling aan breëspektrum antibiotika, onlangse chirurgie, indringende prosedures en ernstige onderliggende siekte. A. baumannii kan deel vorm van die normale velflora, veral in die axillae, inguinale area en tussen die tone. Dit is ook al vanuit die mondholte en die respiratoriese traktus van gesonde volwassenes geïsoleer. Verswakte gehospitaliseerde pasiënte word veral gekoloniseer gedurende nosokomiale Acinetobacter uitbrake. Hierdie organisme is ‘n opportunistiese patogeen en bevat min virulensie faktore. Kliniese manifestasies van A. baumannii sluit nosokomiale pneumonie, nosokomiale bloedstroom infeksies, troumatiese slagveld- en ander wondinfeksies, urienweginfeksies en meningitis wat volg op neurologiese chirurgie in. Fulminerende gemeenskapsverworwe pneumonie is onlangs beskryf en dui aan dat hierdie organisme hoogs patogenies kan wees. Die aantal multi-weerstandige A. baumannii stamme het wêreldwyd toegeneem oor die laaste paar jare. Daarom is die seleksie van empiriese antibiotiese behandeling ‘n uitdaging. Antibiotika kombinasies word meestal as empiriese behandeling in ernstige siek pasiënte gebruik. Die beginsel hiervan is om sinergistiese werking tussen agente te verkry. Die “checkerboard” en “time-kill” metodes is twee tradisionele metodes van sinergisme toetsing. Hierdie metodes is werksintensief, duur en tydrowend. Die E-toets sinergisme metode is gebaseer op die E-toets metode. Hierdie metode is maklik, buigbaar en tydseffektief. Die doel van hierdie studie was om die in vitro aktiwiteit tussen verskillende antibiotika kombinasies van colistin, rifampisien, imipenem, en tobramisien teen geselekteerde kliniese A. baumannii isolate te toets met die “checkerboard” en E-toets sinergisme toetsing metodes. Die minimum inhibitoriese konsentrasies (MIKs) verkry met die E-toets en “broth microdilution” metode is ook vergelyk. Die resultate van die skyfie diffusie metode (die metode wat in die roetiene mikrobiologie laboratorium gebruik word) vir imipenem en tobramisien word ook verskaf vir vergelyking van die resultate van verskillende sensitiwiteitsmetodes. In oorsig is goeie herhaalbaarheid van resultate verkry met al drie metodes van sensitiwiteitstoetsing. Die ooreenstemming van MIKs tussen die “broth dilution” en E-toets metodes was goed en resultate het met nie meer as twee verdunnings in MIK waardes verskil nie. Daar is een uitsondering waar die rifampisien E-toets MIK waarde met drie verdunnings van die MIK waarde verkry met die “microdilution” metode verskil. Die ooreenstemming tussen die sensitiwiteitskategorie resultate tussen die twee metodes was egter swak vir rifampisien. Alhoewel die MIKs in die meeste gevalle met nie meer as twee verdunnings in waarde verskil het nie, was daar baie major foute aangetoon omdat die MIKs rondom die breekpunte geval het. Die kombinasies van colistin + rifampisien, colistin + imipenem, colistin + tobramisien, rifampisien + tobramisien, en imipenem + tobramisien het oorwegend slegs matige interaksie met die E-toets metode getoon. Geen sinergisme is verkry met enige van die antibiotika kombinasies met hierdie metode nie. Daar was egter een resultaat wat antagonisme getoon het vir die kombinasie van colistin + tobramycin. Die resultate van die “checkerboard” metode het sinergisme getoon in vier van die ses isolate wat vir die kombinasie van colistin en rifampisien getoets was. Die ander twee isolate het slegs matige interaksie getoon. Al die ander kombinasies het ook slegs matige interaksie getoon, behalwe in isolaat 30 (col + tob) en isolaat 25 (rif + tob) waar die spesifieke kombinasies sinergisme getoon het. Geen antagonisme is waargeneem met die “checkerboard” metode nie. Met vergelyking van die E-toets en “checkerboard” metodes, is dit opmerklik dat vir die meeste van die antibiotika kombinasies slegs matige interaksie verkry is. Vir die colistin + rifampisien kombinasie toon die “checkerboard” metode egter sinergisme vir 4 uit 6 isolate, terwyl die E-toets metode slegs matige interaksie toon. Vir rifampisien + tobramisien, en colistin + tobramisien kombinasies is sinergisme getoon met die “checkerboard” metode in een isolaat vir elke kombinasie. Die E-toets metode het slegs matige interaksie getoon. Die E-toets sinergisme metode was vinnig, herhaalbaar en maklik om uit te voer. Hierdie studie word egter beperk deur lae getalle van isolate. Dit mag verklaar waarom geen sinergistiese resultate met die E-toets metode verkry is nie en die min sinergistiese resultate met die “checkerboard” metode. Genotipiese analiese met “pulse-field gel electrophoresis” mag in aanmerking geneem word in toekomstige studies om die verwantskap tussen isolate te bepaal wat die seleksie van verskillende stamme vir sinergisme toetsing sal vergemaklik. Verder, kliniese studies is nodig om te bepaal of in vitro sinergisme toetsing van waarde is en of die resultate van sinergisme toetsing ‘n rol speel in die kliniese uitkoms van pasënte geïnfekteer met multiweerstandige A. baumannii. / The National Health Laboratory Serivice