当前位置: X-MOL 学术J. Microbiol. Methods › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Comparison of the recommended colistin susceptibility testing methods with colistin gradient strips and semi-automated method for antimicrobial-resistant non-fermenting rods.
Journal of Microbiological Methods ( IF 1.7 ) Pub Date : 2020-03-27 , DOI: 10.1016/j.mimet.2020.105905
Dagmara Depka 1 , Agnieszka Mikucka 1 , Tomasz Bogiel 1 , Eugenia Gospodarek-Komkowska 1
Affiliation  

An increased frequency of multidrug-resistant non-fermenting rods isolation has resulted in the excessive use of colistin - often the last chance antimicrobial. However, determination of colistin susceptibility is difficult, mainly because of its structure and limited diffusion properties. This study was performed to compare colistin susceptibility testing among Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n = 49) and Acinetobacter baumannii (n = 49) strains. Four methods were applied: colistin gradient strips (Liofilchem, Italy), semi-automated method Phoenix BD (Becton Dickinson, USA) and two broth microdilution methods: SensiTest Colistin (Liofilchem, Italy) and MICRONAUT MIC-Strip (MERLIN Diagnostika GmbH, Germany). Data were analyzed by comparison of MIC values and strains susceptibility interpretation criteria (resistant and sensitive, respectively). The same interpretation results were obtained for 46 (93.9%) P. aeruginosa and 37 (75.5%) A. baumannii isolates in all of the applied methods. Using broth microdilution methods, the same interpretation was obtained for 48 (98.0%) P. aeruginosa and 42 (85.7%) A. baumannii isolates. The results obtained by colistin gradient strips usually confirm the results of broth microdilution tests for P. aeruginosa isolates, the automated method is in turn less labor-intensive. However, MIC values, obtained with their use, are less precise because of the antibiotic dilutions limited to only several concentrations. The results underline the importance of choosing of the appropriate type of method, also among those recommended and commercially available.

中文翻译:

推荐的大肠菌素敏感性测试方法与大肠菌素梯度试纸和半自动方法进行抗药性非发酵棒的比较。

多重耐药性非发酵棒分离的频率增加,导致粘菌素的过量使用-通常是最后一次使用抗菌素的机会。然而,主要由于大肠菌素的结构和有限的扩散特性,很难确定大肠菌素的敏感性。进行这项研究的目的是比较铜绿假单胞菌(n = 49)和鲍曼不动杆菌(n = 49)菌株之间的大肠菌素敏感性测试。应用了四种方法:粘菌素梯度试纸(意大利Liofilchem),半自动方法Phoenix BD(美国Becton Dickinson)和两种肉汤微稀释方法:SensiTest Colistin(意大利Liofilchem)和MICRONAUT MIC-Strip(德国MERLIN Diagnostika GmbH) )。通过比较MIC值和菌株敏感性解释标准(分别为耐药和敏感)来分析数据。在所有应用方法中,对46(93.9%)的铜绿假单胞菌和37(75.5%)的鲍曼不动杆菌分离株获得了相同的解释结果。使用肉汤微量稀释方法,对48株(98.0%)的铜绿假单胞菌和42株(85.7%)的鲍曼不动杆菌分离株获得了相同的解释。大肠菌素梯度试纸获得的结果通常证实了铜绿假单胞菌分离物的肉汤微稀释测试的结果,而自动化方法的劳动强度较低。但是,由于抗生素的稀释仅限于几种浓度,因此使用时获得的MIC值不太准确。结果强调了在推荐的和可商购的方法中选择适当类型的方法的重要性。鲍曼氏菌在所有应用方法中均分离。使用肉汤微量稀释方法,对48株(98.0%)的铜绿假单胞菌和42株(85.7%)的鲍曼不动杆菌分离株获得了相同的解释。大肠菌素梯度试纸获得的结果通常证实了铜绿假单胞菌分离物的肉汤微稀释测试的结果,而自动化方法的劳动强度较低。但是,由于抗生素的稀释仅限于几种浓度,因此使用时获得的MIC值不太准确。结果强调了在推荐的和可商购的方法中选择适当类型的方法的重要性。鲍曼氏菌在所有应用方法中均分离。使用肉汤微量稀释方法,对48株(98.0%)的铜绿假单胞菌和42株(85.7%)的鲍曼不动杆菌分离株获得了相同的解释。大肠菌素梯度试纸获得的结果通常证实了铜绿假单胞菌分离物的肉汤微稀释测试的结果,而自动化方法的劳动强度较低。但是,由于抗生素的稀释仅限于几种浓度,因此使用时获得的MIC值不太准确。结果强调了在推荐的和可商购的方法中选择适当类型的方法的重要性。大肠菌素梯度试纸获得的结果通常证实了铜绿假单胞菌分离物的肉汤微稀释测试的结果,而自动化方法的劳动强度较低。但是,由于抗生素的稀释仅限于几种浓度,因此使用时获得的MIC值不太准确。结果强调了在推荐的和可商购的方法中选择适当类型的方法的重要性。大肠菌素梯度试纸获得的结果通常证实了铜绿假单胞菌分离物的肉汤微稀释测试的结果,而自动化方法的劳动强度较低。但是,由于抗生素的稀释仅限于几种浓度,因此使用时获得的MIC值不太准确。结果强调了在推荐的和可商购的方法中选择适当类型的方法的重要性。
更新日期:2020-03-27
down
wechat
bug