首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy >Multilaboratory Comparison of Proficiencies in Susceptibility Testing of Helicobacter pylori and Correlation between Agar Dilution and E Test Methods
【2h】

Multilaboratory Comparison of Proficiencies in Susceptibility Testing of Helicobacter pylori and Correlation between Agar Dilution and E Test Methods

机译:幽门螺杆菌药敏试验能力的多实验室比较以及琼脂稀释与E检验方法之间的相关性

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Susceptibility testing was performed at seven Canadian microbiology laboratories and the Helicobacter Reference Laboratory, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, to assess susceptibility testing proficiency and the reproducibility of the results for clarithromycin and metronidazole and to compare the Epsilometer test (E test) method to the agar dilution reference method. Control strain Helicobacter pylori ATCC 43504 (American Type Culture Collection) and 13 clinical isolates (plus duplicates of four of these strains including ATCC 43504) were tested blindly. The National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS) guidelines for agar dilution testing were followed, and the same suspension of organisms was used for agar dilution and E test. Antimicrobials and E test strips were provided to the investigators. Methods were provided on a website (). Each center reported MICs within the stated range for strain ATCC 43504. Compared to the average MICs, interlaboratory agreements within 2 log2 dilutions were 90% (range, 69 to 100%) for clarithromycin by agar dilution, with seven very major errors [VMEs], and 85% (range, 65 to 100%) by E test, with three VMEs. Interlaboratory agreements within 2 log2 dilutions were 83% (range, 50 to 100%) for metronidazole by agar dilution, with six VMEs and eight major errors (MEs), and 75% (range, 50 to 94%) by E test, with four VMEs and four MEs. At lower and higher concentrations of antibiotic, E test MICs were slightly different from agar dilution MICs, but these differences did not result in errors. When a standardized protocol based on NCCLS guidelines was used, most participants in this study correctly identified clarithromycin- and metronidazole-susceptible and -resistant strains of H. pylori 93% of the time by either the agar dilution or E test method, and the numbers of errors were relatively equivalent by both methods.
机译:在七个加拿大微生物学实验室和加拿大新斯科舍省哈利法克斯的幽门螺杆菌参考实验室进行了药敏试验,以评估药敏试验的熟练程度以及克拉霉素和甲硝唑的结果可重复性,并与荧光计试验(E检验)方法进行比较。琼脂稀释参考法。盲目测试了对照菌株幽门螺杆菌ATCC 43504(美国典型培养物保藏所)和13种临床分离株(包括ATCC 43504在内的4个菌株的重复品)。遵循了美国国家临床实验室标准委员会(NCCLS)琼脂稀释测试指南,并将相同的生物悬浮液用于琼脂稀释和E测试。为研究人员提供了抗菌剂和E试纸。方法在网站()上提供。每个中心报告的ATCC 43504菌株的MIC均在规定范围内。与琼脂稀释后的2 log2稀释度相比,克拉霉素对克拉霉素的实验室间一致性为90%(范围从69%到100%),其中有7个非常严重的误差[VME] ,以及使用三个VME进行E测试的85%(范围从65%到100%)。通过琼脂稀释对甲硝唑进行2 log2稀释后的实验室间协议为83%(范围为50至100%),具有6个VME和8个主要误差(ME),通过E检验为75%(范围为50至94%),通过四个VME和四个ME。在较低和较高浓度的抗生素下,E检验MIC与琼脂稀释MIC略有不同,但这些差异不会导致错误。当使用基于NCCLS指南的标准化方案时,本研究中的大多数参与者通过琼脂稀释或E检验方法正确鉴定了克拉霉素和甲硝唑敏感和耐药的幽门螺杆菌菌株,检出率分别为93%和两种方法的错误率相对相等。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号