Article

Approaches to reduce antibiotic resistance in the community.

Department of Microbiology, Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal de Créteil, Créteil, France.
The Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal (Impact Factor: 3.14). 11/2006; 25(10):977-80. DOI: 10.1097/01.inf.0000239271.10784.1e
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT During the last two decades, there has been an alarming worldwide increase of resistance to antibiotics of bacterial pathogens responsible for community-acquired infections. This dramatic evolution is generally attributed to the extensive use of antibiotics and the selective pressure on the bacterial strains. To decrease antibiotics resistance in the community, several approaches should be considered through: reducing unnecessary antibiotic prescriptions: inappropriate antibiotic treatments are becoming a major issue; however, few studies have shown a decrease of antibiotic resistance following a reduction of antibiotic use in the community;decreasing the prescriptions of the more selective antibiotic compounds for some bacterial species, eg macrolides and group A streptococcus (GAS), trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole and pneumococcus; using an optimal dosage and duration of antibiotic regimens chosen; some studies have suggested that low dosage and long treatment duration could promote antibiotic resistance; and implementing the pneumococcal conjugate vaccines; several studies have shown a decline in the proportion of penicillin nonsusceptible Streptococcus pneumoniae isolated from invasive pneumococcal diseases or nasopharyngeal flora. The combination of these approaches, particularly the reduction of antibiotic use and pneumococcal immunization, could be synergistic.

2 Followers
 · 
266 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Over-expression of multidrug efflux pumps of the Resistance Nodulation Division (RND) protein super family counts among the main causes for microbial resistance against pharmaceuticals. Understanding the molecular basis of this process is one of the major challenges of modern biomedical research, involving a broad range of experimental and computational techniques. Here we review the current state of RND transporter investigation employing molecular dynamics simulations providing conformational samples of transporter components to obtain insights into the functional mechanism underlying efflux pump-mediated antibiotics resistance in Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa.
    02/2013; 5(6):e201302008. DOI:10.5936/csbj.201302008
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Representing a physiological "Achilles' heel", the cell wall precursor lipid II (LII) is a prime target for various classes of antibiotics. Over the years LII-binding agents have been recognized as promising candidates and templates in the search for new antibacterial compounds to complement or replace existing drugs. To elucidate the molecular structural basis underlying LII functional mechanism and to better understand if and how lantibiotic binding alters the molecular behavior of LII, we performed molecular dynamics (MD) simulations of phospholipid membrane-embedded LII in absence and presence of the LII-binding lantibiotic nisin. In a series of 2 x 4 independent, unbiased 100ns MD simulations we sampled the conformational dynamics of nine LII as well as nine LII-nisin complexes embedded in an aqueous 150mM NaCl / POPC phospholipid membrane environment. We found that nisin binding to LII induces a reduction of LII mobility and flexibility, an outward shift of the LII pentapeptide, an inward movement of the LII disaccharide section, and an overall deeper insertion of the LII tail group into the membrane. The latter process might indicate an initial step in adopting a stabililzing, scaffold-like structure in the process of nisin-induced membrane leakage. At the same time nisin conformation and LII interaction remain similar to the 1WCO LII-nisin NMR solution structure.
    Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Biomembranes 08/2014; 1838(12). DOI:10.1016/j.bbamem.2014.07.024 · 3.43 Impact Factor
  • Archives de Pédiatrie 06/2012; 19(6):H141–H142. DOI:10.1016/S0929-693X(12)71181-8 · 0.41 Impact Factor

Preview

Download
7 Downloads
Available from