Skip directly to search Skip directly to A to Z list Skip directly to page options Skip directly to site content

Volume 14, Number 5—May 2008

Letter

Alternatives to Ciprofloxacin Use for Enteric Fever, United Kingdom

E. John Threlfall*Comments to Author , Elizabeth de Pinna*, Martin Day*, Joanne Lawrence*, and Jane Jones*
Author affiliations: *Health Protection Agency, London, UK;

Main Article

Table

Incidence of resistance/decreased susceptibility to key antimicrobial agents in isolates of Salmonella enterica serovars Typhi and Paratyphi A, United Kingdom, 2001–2006*

Year No. studied % S. Typhi resistant to
No. studied % S. Paratyphi A resistant to
C A Tm CpL CpH C A Tm CpL CpH
2001 170 24 23 23 35 0 232 28 27 27 23 2
2002 150 18 17 17 35 1 149 10 9 10 39 3
2003 218 20 20 21 43 1 177 17 18 17 65 12
2004 215 23 23 24 47 2 221 5 5 5 70 14
2005 222 29 29 29 62 2 217 7 7 7 60 12
2006 240 23 24 24 68 2 278 2 3 2 64 9

*C, chloramphenicol; A, ampicillin, Tm, trimethoprim, CpL, ciprofloxacin MIC 0.25–1.0 mg/L; CpH, ciprofloxacin MIC >1.0 mg/L. No isolates exhibited resistance to ceftriaxone or cefotaxime; of 50 S. Typhi and 40 S. Paratyphi A isolated in 2005 and 2006, the MIC to azithromycin by E test (AB Biodisk, Solna, Sweden) was not greater than 8 mg/L for S. Typhi and 12 mg/L for S. Paratyphi A, which corresponds to those of drug-sensitive controls of the respective serotypes.

Main Article

TOP