首页> 外文OA文献 >Comparative evaluation of colistin susceptibility testing methods among carbapenem-nonsusceptible Klebsiella pneumoniae and Acinetobacter baumannii clinical isolates
【2h】

Comparative evaluation of colistin susceptibility testing methods among carbapenem-nonsusceptible Klebsiella pneumoniae and Acinetobacter baumannii clinical isolates

机译:碳青霉烯类不易感肺炎克雷伯菌和鲍曼不动杆菌临床分离株粘菌素敏感性试验方法的比较评价

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

We compared six colistin susceptibility testing (ST) methods on 61 carbapenem-nonsusceptible Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 41) and Acinetobacter baumannii (n = 20) clinical isolates with provisionally elevated colistin MICs by routine ST. Colistin MICs were determined by broth microdilution (BMD), BMD with 0.002% polysorbate 80 (P80) (BMD-P80), agar dilution (AD), Etest, Vitek2, and MIC test strip (MTS). BMD was used as the reference method for comparison. The EUCAST-recommended susceptible and resistant breakpoints of ≤2 and >2 μg/ml, respectively, were applied for both K. pneumoniae and A. baumannii. The proportions of colistin-resistant strains were 95.1, 77, 96.7, 57.4, 65.6, and 98.4% by BMD, BMD-P80, AD, Etest, MTS, and Vitek2, respectively. The Etest and MTS methods produced excessive rates of very major errors (VMEs) (39.3 and 31.1%, respectively), while BMD-P80 produced 18% VMEs, AD produced 3.3% VMEs, and Vitek2 produced no VMEs. Major errors (MEs) were rather limited by all tested methods. These data show that gradient diffusion methods may lead to inappropriate colistin therapy. Clinical laboratories should consider the use of automated systems, such as Vitek2, or dilution methods for colistin ST. Copyright © 2015, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
机译:我们比较了常规ST法对61株碳青霉烯类不敏感肺炎克雷伯菌肺炎克雷伯菌(n = 41)和鲍曼不动杆菌(n = 20)的六种大肠菌素敏感性测试(ST)方法与临时升高的大肠菌素MIC的关系。通过肉汤微稀释(BMD),含0.002%聚山梨酯80的BMD(P80)(BMD-P80),琼脂稀释(AD),Etest,Vitek2和MIC试纸条(MTS)测定共利斯汀MIC。 BMD被用作比较的参考方法。对于肺炎克雷伯氏菌和鲍曼不动杆菌,均采用EUCAST推荐的≤2和> 2μg/ ml的敏感和抗性断裂点。 BMD,BMD-P80,AD,Etest,MTS和Vitek2分别对大肠菌素耐药菌株的比例分别为95.1、77、96.7、57.4、65.6和98.4%。 Etest和MTS方法产生非常严重的错误(VME)的比率过高(分别为39.3和31.1%),而BMD-P80产生了18%的VME,AD产生了3.3%的VME,Vitek2没有产生VME。重大错误(ME)受所有测试方法的限制。这些数据表明梯度扩散方法可能导致不合适的粘菌素治疗。临床实验室应考虑使用自动化系统(例如Vitek2)或粘菌素ST的稀释方法。美国微生物学会版权所有©2015。版权所有。

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