In vitro activity of temocillin against prevalent extended-spectrum beta-lactamases producing Enterobacteriaceae from Belgian intensive care units

  • Y. GlupczynskiEmail author
  • T.-D. Huang
  • C. Berhin
  • G. Claeys
  • M. Delmée
  • L. Ide
  • G. Ieven
  • D. Pierard
  • H. Rodriguez-Villalobos
  • M. Struelens
  • J. Vaneldere


Temocillin is a narrow spectrum penicillin with high stability to most β-lactamases including AmpC types and extended-spectrum types (ESBLs). We have analysed its in vitro activity against 652 clinical isolates of Enterobacteriaceae prospectively collected from patients hospitalised in intensive care units at seven different university hospitals in Belgium in 2005. Strains were screened for ESBL production using cefotaxime and ceftazidime screen agar plates and by double ESBL E-tests. The MIC of temocillin and of five comparators was determined using the E-test method. ESBLs were characterized at one central laboratory by isoelectric focusing, PCR for bla genes of the SHV, TEM, and CTX-M families, and by DNA sequencing. The prevalence of ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae averaged 11.8% and ranged between 3.0 and 29% in the different hospitals. Meropenem exhibited the highest in vitro activity overall (mode MIC 0.064 μg; MIC90; 0.19 μg/ml), whereas ceftazidime (MIC90 > 256 μg/ml) and ciprofloxacin (MIC90 > 32 μg/ml) scored the worst. Temocillin was active against more than 90% of the isolates including most AmpC- and ESBL-producing isolates. These data indicate the well preserved activity of temocillin over the years against Enterobacteriaceae and show the wide variation in prevalence of ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae isolates in Belgian intensive care units. Prospective clinical studies are, however, needed to validate the usefulness of temocillin in the treatment of microbiologically documented infections caused by ESBL- and/or AmpC- overproducing nosocomial Enterobacteriaceae pathogens.


Ceftazidime Meropenem AmpC Enterobacter Cloaca Temocillin 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This study was supported in part by a grant of Eumedica S.A., Brussels, Belgium. We are indebted to S. Carryn for logistic support in the set up of the studies and for providing the required study material.


  1. 1.
    Slocombe B, Cooper CE, Griffin KE, White AR (1985) Temocillin: in vitro antibacterial activity. Drugs 29(Suppl 5):49–56PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Van Landuyt H, Boelaert J, Piot P, Verbist L (1985) In vitro activity of temocillin against clinical isolates. Drugs 29(Suppl 5):1–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Spencer RC (1990) Temocillin. J Antimicrob Chemother 26:735–737PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Taylor RF, Gaya H, Hodson ME (1992) Temocillin and cystic fibrosis: outcome of intravenous administration in patients infected with Pseudomonas cepacia. J Antimicrob Chemother 29:341–344PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lekkas A, Gyi KM, Hodson ME (2006) Temocillin in the treatment of Burkholderia cepacia infections in cystic fibrosis. J Cyst Fibros 5:121–124PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Vanhoof R, Berhin C, Carpentier M, et al (2001) Comparative in vitro activity of temocillin and other antimicrobial agents against Enterobacteriaceae isolated from patients admitted to five Belgian hospitals. Acta Clin Belg 56:354–359PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rodriguez-Villalobos H, Malaviolle V, Frankard J, de Mendonça R, Nonhoff C, Struelens MJ (2006) In vitro activity of temocillin against extended spectrum β-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli. J Antimicrob Chemother 57:771–774Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Livermore DM, Hope R, Fagan EJ, Warner M, Woodford N, Potz N (2006) Activity of temocillin against prevalent ESBL- and AmpC-producing Enterobacteriaceae from south-east England. J Antimicrob Chemother 57:1012–1014PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (2006) Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing. Approved standard MS100-S16. CLSI, Wayne, PA, USAGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fuchs PC, Barry AL, Thornsberry C, Jones RN (1985) Interpretive criteria for temocillin disk diffusion susceptibility testing. Eur J Clin Microbiol 4:30–33PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Stürenburg E, Sobottka I, Noor D, Laufs R, Mack D (2004) Evaluation of a new cefepime-clavulanate ESBL Etest to detect extended-spectrum β-lactamases in an Enterobacteriaceae strain collection. J Antimicrob Chemother 54:134–138PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    De Gheldre Y, Avesani V, Berhin C, Delmee M, Glupczynski Y (2003) Evaluation of Oxoid combination discs for detection of extended-spectrum β-lactamases. J Antimicrob Chemother 52:591–597PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    De Gheldre Y, Glupczynski Y, Berhin C et al (2004) Epidemiology of Enterobacter aerogenes in Belgium: results of a multicentre survey. In: Abstracts of the 14th European Congress of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. Abstract no. P-1122. Clin Microbiol Infect 10(Suppl 3):305 (abstract)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    De Gheldre Y, Struelens MJ, Glupczynski Y, et al (2001) National epidemic surveys of Enterobacter aerogenes in Belgian hospitals from 1996 to 1998. J Clin Microbiol 39:889–896PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Glupczynski Y, Delmée M, Goossens H, Struelens MJ (2001) Distribution and prevalence of antimicrobial resistance among gram-negative isolates in intensive care units in Belgian hospitals between 1996 and 1999. Acta Clin Belg 56:297–306PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ieven M, Delmee M, De Mol P et al (2006) Eight years of Belgian MYSTIC surveillance: 1998–2005. In: Abstracts of the 16th European Congress of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Nice, France, April 2006, Abstract no. P-1387Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rodriguez-Villalobos H, Malaviolle V, Frankard J et al (2005) Emergence of CTX-M extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli in Belgium. Euro-surveillance Weekly 10:63. Available online: (

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Y. Glupczynski
    • 1
    Email author
  • T.-D. Huang
    • 1
  • C. Berhin
    • 1
  • G. Claeys
    • 2
  • M. Delmée
    • 3
  • L. Ide
    • 4
  • G. Ieven
    • 5
  • D. Pierard
    • 6
  • H. Rodriguez-Villalobos
    • 7
  • M. Struelens
    • 7
  • J. Vaneldere
    • 4
  1. 1.Cliniques universitaires UCL de Mont-GodinneLaboratoire de MicrobiologieYvoirBelgium
  2. 2.Laboratorium MicrobiologieUniversitair Ziekenhuis GentGentBelgium
  3. 3.Cliniques universitaires UCL Saint-LucUnité de MicrobiologieBrusselsBelgium
  4. 4.UZ KU LeuvenLaboratorium MicrobiologieLeuvenBelgium
  5. 5.UZ AntwerpenLaboratorium MicrobiologieEdegemBelgium
  6. 6.AZ VUB JetteLaboratorium MicrobiologieBrusselsBelgium
  7. 7.Hôpital universitaire Erasme ULBLaboratoire de MicrobiologieBrusselsBelgium

Personalised recommendations