Glycopeptide resistance in coagulase-negative staphylococci
Coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS) were the first organisms in which acquired glycopeptide resistance was recognized. Ever since the early reports, it has been apparent that resistance to teicoplanin is more common than that to vancomycin and that resistance occurs mostly in species such as Stap...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases 2000-06, Vol.19 (6), p.403-417 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 417 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 403 |
container_title | European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases |
container_volume | 19 |
creator | BIAVASCO, F VIGNAROLI, C VARALDO, P. E |
description | Coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS) were the first organisms in which acquired glycopeptide resistance was recognized. Ever since the early reports, it has been apparent that resistance to teicoplanin is more common than that to vancomycin and that resistance occurs mostly in species such as Staphylococcus haemolyticus and Staphylococcus epidermidis. The minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of teicoplanin for CNS usually fall over a wide range, and, especially in some methicillin-resistant isolates of the two above-mentioned species, they can reach and even exceed the resistance breakpoint, whereas vancomycin MICs tend to remain more stable over a narrower range within the limits of susceptibility. CNS strains intermediately susceptible and even resistant not only to teicoplanin but also to vancomycin have, however, been isolated, most frequently from patients subjected to prolonged glycopeptide treatment. Laboratory detection of glycopeptide-resistant CNS may be problematic, mainly because susceptibility tests, particularly those for teicoplanin, are influenced by various technical factors, and agar diffusion tests may yield false susceptibility data. In studies with experimental glycopeptides, some molecules have exhibited improved in vitro activity compared with teicoplanin and vancomycin, but these encouraging microbiological findings have not usually been followed by in vivo trials. Stepwise and single-step exposure to teicoplanin and vancomycin has allowed stable clones for which glycopeptide MICs are increased to be obtained from susceptible CNS strains, particularly strains of Staphylococcus haemolyticus and Staphylococcus epidermidis. In these studies, resistance to teicoplanin was generally easier to obtain than resistance to vancomycin, and the levels of teicoplanin resistance were higher. Population studies have demonstrated the usually heterogeneous nature of glycopeptide resistance in CNS. Although glycopeptide-resistant CNS have been shown to differ in several features from their glycopeptide-susceptible counterparts, the exact mechanism of staphylococcal glycopeptide resistance remains unknown. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s100960000299 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71745558</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2369994101</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-c176bb630ae6fc9717a503dc0be2215261b3d73ad15661e09ee29d6930facb603</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqF0c1LwzAYBvAgipvTo1cZIt6qb5ImafAkQ6cw8KLnkqZvZ0bX1KYV9t-bsYEfF3NIDvnxkPcJIecUbiiAug1x1xLiYlofkDFNuUhSrvghGYPmaaIV4yNyEsIqGpUpdUxGFHSqGE3H5G5eb6xvse1didMOgwu9aSxOXTO13iyH2gRMGlya3n3iNF6275vaW2-tOyVHlakDnu3PCXl7fHidPSWLl_nz7H6R2JRBn1iqZFFIDgZlZbWiygjgpYUCGaOCSVrwUnFTUiElRdCITJdSc6iMLSTwCbne5bad_xgw9PnaBYt1bRr0Q8hjYiqEyP6F8SFMiUxHePkHrvzQNXGIPFMUqFKwTUt2yHY-hA6rvO3c2nSbnEK-7T7_1X30F_vQoVhj-UPvyo7gag9MsKauuli0C98u_prSGf8CeE6KBw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>871017708</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Glycopeptide resistance in coagulase-negative staphylococci</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals</source><creator>BIAVASCO, F ; VIGNAROLI, C ; VARALDO, P. E</creator><creatorcontrib>BIAVASCO, F ; VIGNAROLI, C ; VARALDO, P. E</creatorcontrib><description>Coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS) were the first organisms in which acquired glycopeptide resistance was recognized. Ever since the early reports, it has been apparent that resistance to teicoplanin is more common than that to vancomycin and that resistance occurs mostly in species such as Staphylococcus haemolyticus and Staphylococcus epidermidis. The minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of teicoplanin for CNS usually fall over a wide range, and, especially in some methicillin-resistant isolates of the two above-mentioned species, they can reach and even exceed the resistance breakpoint, whereas vancomycin MICs tend to remain more stable over a narrower range within the limits of susceptibility. CNS strains intermediately susceptible and even resistant not only to teicoplanin but also to vancomycin have, however, been isolated, most frequently from patients subjected to prolonged glycopeptide treatment. Laboratory detection of glycopeptide-resistant CNS may be problematic, mainly because susceptibility tests, particularly those for teicoplanin, are influenced by various technical factors, and agar diffusion tests may yield false susceptibility data. In studies with experimental glycopeptides, some molecules have exhibited improved in vitro activity compared with teicoplanin and vancomycin, but these encouraging microbiological findings have not usually been followed by in vivo trials. Stepwise and single-step exposure to teicoplanin and vancomycin has allowed stable clones for which glycopeptide MICs are increased to be obtained from susceptible CNS strains, particularly strains of Staphylococcus haemolyticus and Staphylococcus epidermidis. In these studies, resistance to teicoplanin was generally easier to obtain than resistance to vancomycin, and the levels of teicoplanin resistance were higher. Population studies have demonstrated the usually heterogeneous nature of glycopeptide resistance in CNS. Although glycopeptide-resistant CNS have been shown to differ in several features from their glycopeptide-susceptible counterparts, the exact mechanism of staphylococcal glycopeptide resistance remains unknown.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0934-9723</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1435-4373</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s100960000299</identifier><identifier>PMID: 10947214</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin: Springer</publisher><subject>Anti-Bacterial Agents - pharmacology ; Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use ; Antibacterial agents ; Antibiotics ; Antibiotics. Antiinfectious agents. Antiparasitic agents ; Bacterial infections ; Biological and medical sciences ; Clinical medicine ; Coagulase - metabolism ; Drug Resistance, Microbial ; glycopeptide antibiotics ; Gram-positive bacteria ; Humans ; Infections ; Laboratories ; Medical sciences ; Microbial Sensitivity Tests ; Pathogens ; Pharmacology. Drug treatments ; Population studies ; Staphylococcal Infections - drug therapy ; Staphylococcal Infections - microbiology ; Staphylococcus - drug effects ; Staphylococcus - enzymology ; Staphylococcus - genetics ; Staphylococcus epidermidis ; Staphylococcus haemolyticus ; Teicoplanin - pharmacology ; Teicoplanin - therapeutic use ; Toxicity ; Vancomycin - pharmacology ; Vancomycin - therapeutic use ; Vancomycin Resistance</subject><ispartof>European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases, 2000-06, Vol.19 (6), p.403-417</ispartof><rights>2000 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-c176bb630ae6fc9717a503dc0be2215261b3d73ad15661e09ee29d6930facb603</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=1437798$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10947214$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>BIAVASCO, F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VIGNAROLI, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VARALDO, P. E</creatorcontrib><title>Glycopeptide resistance in coagulase-negative staphylococci</title><title>European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases</title><addtitle>Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis</addtitle><description>Coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS) were the first organisms in which acquired glycopeptide resistance was recognized. Ever since the early reports, it has been apparent that resistance to teicoplanin is more common than that to vancomycin and that resistance occurs mostly in species such as Staphylococcus haemolyticus and Staphylococcus epidermidis. The minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of teicoplanin for CNS usually fall over a wide range, and, especially in some methicillin-resistant isolates of the two above-mentioned species, they can reach and even exceed the resistance breakpoint, whereas vancomycin MICs tend to remain more stable over a narrower range within the limits of susceptibility. CNS strains intermediately susceptible and even resistant not only to teicoplanin but also to vancomycin have, however, been isolated, most frequently from patients subjected to prolonged glycopeptide treatment. Laboratory detection of glycopeptide-resistant CNS may be problematic, mainly because susceptibility tests, particularly those for teicoplanin, are influenced by various technical factors, and agar diffusion tests may yield false susceptibility data. In studies with experimental glycopeptides, some molecules have exhibited improved in vitro activity compared with teicoplanin and vancomycin, but these encouraging microbiological findings have not usually been followed by in vivo trials. Stepwise and single-step exposure to teicoplanin and vancomycin has allowed stable clones for which glycopeptide MICs are increased to be obtained from susceptible CNS strains, particularly strains of Staphylococcus haemolyticus and Staphylococcus epidermidis. In these studies, resistance to teicoplanin was generally easier to obtain than resistance to vancomycin, and the levels of teicoplanin resistance were higher. Population studies have demonstrated the usually heterogeneous nature of glycopeptide resistance in CNS. Although glycopeptide-resistant CNS have been shown to differ in several features from their glycopeptide-susceptible counterparts, the exact mechanism of staphylococcal glycopeptide resistance remains unknown.</description><subject>Anti-Bacterial Agents - pharmacology</subject><subject>Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Antibacterial agents</subject><subject>Antibiotics</subject><subject>Antibiotics. Antiinfectious agents. Antiparasitic agents</subject><subject>Bacterial infections</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Clinical medicine</subject><subject>Coagulase - metabolism</subject><subject>Drug Resistance, Microbial</subject><subject>glycopeptide antibiotics</subject><subject>Gram-positive bacteria</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Infections</subject><subject>Laboratories</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Microbial Sensitivity Tests</subject><subject>Pathogens</subject><subject>Pharmacology. Drug treatments</subject><subject>Population studies</subject><subject>Staphylococcal Infections - drug therapy</subject><subject>Staphylococcal Infections - microbiology</subject><subject>Staphylococcus - drug effects</subject><subject>Staphylococcus - enzymology</subject><subject>Staphylococcus - genetics</subject><subject>Staphylococcus epidermidis</subject><subject>Staphylococcus haemolyticus</subject><subject>Teicoplanin - pharmacology</subject><subject>Teicoplanin - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Toxicity</subject><subject>Vancomycin - pharmacology</subject><subject>Vancomycin - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Vancomycin Resistance</subject><issn>0934-9723</issn><issn>1435-4373</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2000</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNqF0c1LwzAYBvAgipvTo1cZIt6qb5ImafAkQ6cw8KLnkqZvZ0bX1KYV9t-bsYEfF3NIDvnxkPcJIecUbiiAug1x1xLiYlofkDFNuUhSrvghGYPmaaIV4yNyEsIqGpUpdUxGFHSqGE3H5G5eb6xvse1didMOgwu9aSxOXTO13iyH2gRMGlya3n3iNF6275vaW2-tOyVHlakDnu3PCXl7fHidPSWLl_nz7H6R2JRBn1iqZFFIDgZlZbWiygjgpYUCGaOCSVrwUnFTUiElRdCITJdSc6iMLSTwCbne5bad_xgw9PnaBYt1bRr0Q8hjYiqEyP6F8SFMiUxHePkHrvzQNXGIPFMUqFKwTUt2yHY-hA6rvO3c2nSbnEK-7T7_1X30F_vQoVhj-UPvyo7gag9MsKauuli0C98u_prSGf8CeE6KBw</recordid><startdate>20000601</startdate><enddate>20000601</enddate><creator>BIAVASCO, F</creator><creator>VIGNAROLI, C</creator><creator>VARALDO, P. E</creator><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>PHGZM</scope><scope>PHGZT</scope><scope>PJZUB</scope><scope>PKEHL</scope><scope>PPXIY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQGLB</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20000601</creationdate><title>Glycopeptide resistance in coagulase-negative staphylococci</title><author>BIAVASCO, F ; VIGNAROLI, C ; VARALDO, P. E</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-c176bb630ae6fc9717a503dc0be2215261b3d73ad15661e09ee29d6930facb603</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2000</creationdate><topic>Anti-Bacterial Agents - pharmacology</topic><topic>Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Antibacterial agents</topic><topic>Antibiotics</topic><topic>Antibiotics. Antiinfectious agents. Antiparasitic agents</topic><topic>Bacterial infections</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Clinical medicine</topic><topic>Coagulase - metabolism</topic><topic>Drug Resistance, Microbial</topic><topic>glycopeptide antibiotics</topic><topic>Gram-positive bacteria</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Infections</topic><topic>Laboratories</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Microbial Sensitivity Tests</topic><topic>Pathogens</topic><topic>Pharmacology. Drug treatments</topic><topic>Population studies</topic><topic>Staphylococcal Infections - drug therapy</topic><topic>Staphylococcal Infections - microbiology</topic><topic>Staphylococcus - drug effects</topic><topic>Staphylococcus - enzymology</topic><topic>Staphylococcus - genetics</topic><topic>Staphylococcus epidermidis</topic><topic>Staphylococcus haemolyticus</topic><topic>Teicoplanin - pharmacology</topic><topic>Teicoplanin - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Toxicity</topic><topic>Vancomycin - pharmacology</topic><topic>Vancomycin - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Vancomycin Resistance</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>BIAVASCO, F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VIGNAROLI, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VARALDO, P. E</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Health & Nursing</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Applied & Life Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>BIAVASCO, F</au><au>VIGNAROLI, C</au><au>VARALDO, P. E</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Glycopeptide resistance in coagulase-negative staphylococci</atitle><jtitle>European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases</jtitle><addtitle>Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis</addtitle><date>2000-06-01</date><risdate>2000</risdate><volume>19</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>403</spage><epage>417</epage><pages>403-417</pages><issn>0934-9723</issn><eissn>1435-4373</eissn><abstract>Coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS) were the first organisms in which acquired glycopeptide resistance was recognized. Ever since the early reports, it has been apparent that resistance to teicoplanin is more common than that to vancomycin and that resistance occurs mostly in species such as Staphylococcus haemolyticus and Staphylococcus epidermidis. The minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of teicoplanin for CNS usually fall over a wide range, and, especially in some methicillin-resistant isolates of the two above-mentioned species, they can reach and even exceed the resistance breakpoint, whereas vancomycin MICs tend to remain more stable over a narrower range within the limits of susceptibility. CNS strains intermediately susceptible and even resistant not only to teicoplanin but also to vancomycin have, however, been isolated, most frequently from patients subjected to prolonged glycopeptide treatment. Laboratory detection of glycopeptide-resistant CNS may be problematic, mainly because susceptibility tests, particularly those for teicoplanin, are influenced by various technical factors, and agar diffusion tests may yield false susceptibility data. In studies with experimental glycopeptides, some molecules have exhibited improved in vitro activity compared with teicoplanin and vancomycin, but these encouraging microbiological findings have not usually been followed by in vivo trials. Stepwise and single-step exposure to teicoplanin and vancomycin has allowed stable clones for which glycopeptide MICs are increased to be obtained from susceptible CNS strains, particularly strains of Staphylococcus haemolyticus and Staphylococcus epidermidis. In these studies, resistance to teicoplanin was generally easier to obtain than resistance to vancomycin, and the levels of teicoplanin resistance were higher. Population studies have demonstrated the usually heterogeneous nature of glycopeptide resistance in CNS. Although glycopeptide-resistant CNS have been shown to differ in several features from their glycopeptide-susceptible counterparts, the exact mechanism of staphylococcal glycopeptide resistance remains unknown.</abstract><cop>Berlin</cop><pub>Springer</pub><pmid>10947214</pmid><doi>10.1007/s100960000299</doi><tpages>15</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0934-9723 |
ispartof | European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases, 2000-06, Vol.19 (6), p.403-417 |
issn | 0934-9723 1435-4373 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71745558 |
source | MEDLINE; Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals |
subjects | Anti-Bacterial Agents - pharmacology Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use Antibacterial agents Antibiotics Antibiotics. Antiinfectious agents. Antiparasitic agents Bacterial infections Biological and medical sciences Clinical medicine Coagulase - metabolism Drug Resistance, Microbial glycopeptide antibiotics Gram-positive bacteria Humans Infections Laboratories Medical sciences Microbial Sensitivity Tests Pathogens Pharmacology. Drug treatments Population studies Staphylococcal Infections - drug therapy Staphylococcal Infections - microbiology Staphylococcus - drug effects Staphylococcus - enzymology Staphylococcus - genetics Staphylococcus epidermidis Staphylococcus haemolyticus Teicoplanin - pharmacology Teicoplanin - therapeutic use Toxicity Vancomycin - pharmacology Vancomycin - therapeutic use Vancomycin Resistance |
title | Glycopeptide resistance in coagulase-negative staphylococci |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-21T17%3A54%3A26IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Glycopeptide%20resistance%20in%20coagulase-negative%20staphylococci&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20clinical%20microbiology%20&%20infectious%20diseases&rft.au=BIAVASCO,%20F&rft.date=2000-06-01&rft.volume=19&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=403&rft.epage=417&rft.pages=403-417&rft.issn=0934-9723&rft.eissn=1435-4373&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s100960000299&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2369994101%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=871017708&rft_id=info:pmid/10947214&rfr_iscdi=true |