English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The postantibiotic effect (PAE) of meropenem was determined for 11 strains, both clinical isolates and reference strains of members of the family Enterobacteriaceae. The study compares PAE results obtained by five methods used to monitor bacterial regrowth, including viable counting, alone and in combination with impedance; bioluminescence, alone and in combination with impedance; and a morphological technique. After exposure of the test organisms to meropenem (0.1 x to 100 x MIC) for 2 h, concentration-dependent differences in counts by bioluminescence and viable counts were observed, the latter always being lower. The differences varied with the test organism. For example, after exposure of Providentia stuartii NCTC 10318 to 0.1 x MIC, the counts were 5.5 x 10(5) and 2.0 x 10(5) whereas after exposure of Citrobacter freundii MR76 to 0.1 x MIC of meropenem the counts were 2.3 x 10(6) and 6.8 x 10(3) by bioluminescence and viable counting, respectively. The discrepancies were probably due to the relative inability of the viable counting procedure to detect fragile aberrant morphologies and resulted in differences in the calculated PAE values. With methods which do not detect fragile morphologies, the PAE may be underestimated. A general trend was observed for the order of magnitude of the PAEs by the following methods (in order of decreasing magnitude of PAE): (i) morphological technique, (ii) bioluminescence technique alone, (iii) bioluminescence in combination with impedance, (iv) viable counting in combination with impedance, and (v) viable counting alone. It is our opinion that of the methods examined in this study, bioluminescence in combination with impedance best reflects the true values for PAEs, and these results were examined more closely.

Postantibiotic effect of meropenem on members of the family Enterobacteriaceae determined by five methods