Comparison of MICE and Etest with CLSI Agar Dilution for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing against Oxacillin-Resistant Staphylococcus spp.
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2014 |
Outros Autores: | , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP |
Texto Completo: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0094627 http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/37663 |
Resumo: | Objective: the main objective of this study was to comparatively evaluate the performance of M. I. C. E. and Etest methodologies to that of agar dilution for determining the antimicrobial susceptibility profile of oxacillin-resistant Staphylococcus spp.Methods: A total of 100 oxacillin-resistant Staphylococcus spp. isolates were collected from hospitalized patients at a teaching hospital. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing for vancomycin, teicoplanin and linezolid was performed using the reference CLSI agar dilution method (2009), Etest and M. I. C. E. methodologies. the MIC values were interpreted according to CLSI susceptibility breakpoints and compared by regression analysis.Results: in general, the essential agreement (+/- 1-log(2)) between M. I. C. E. and CLSI agar dilution was 93.0%, 84.0% and 77.0% for linezolid, teicoplanin and vancomycin, respectively. Essential agreement rates between M. I. C. E. and Etest were excellent (>90.0%) for all antibiotics tested. Both strips (M. I. C. E. and Etest) yielded two very major errors for linezolid. Unacceptable minor rates were observed for teicoplanin against CoNS and for vancomycin against S. aureus.Conclusions: According to our results, linezolid and teicoplanin MICs against all staphylococci and S. aureus, respectively, were more accurately predicted by M. I. C. E. strips. However, the Etest showed better performance than M. I. C. E. for predicting vancomycin MICs against all staphylococci. Thus, microbiologists must be aware of the different performance of commercially available gradient strips against staphylococci. |
id |
UFSP_6142c0167a153b2138164babf96fbdc5 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.unifesp.br/:11600/37663 |
network_acronym_str |
UFSP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP |
repository_id_str |
3465 |
spelling |
Comparison of MICE and Etest with CLSI Agar Dilution for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing against Oxacillin-Resistant Staphylococcus spp.Objective: the main objective of this study was to comparatively evaluate the performance of M. I. C. E. and Etest methodologies to that of agar dilution for determining the antimicrobial susceptibility profile of oxacillin-resistant Staphylococcus spp.Methods: A total of 100 oxacillin-resistant Staphylococcus spp. isolates were collected from hospitalized patients at a teaching hospital. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing for vancomycin, teicoplanin and linezolid was performed using the reference CLSI agar dilution method (2009), Etest and M. I. C. E. methodologies. the MIC values were interpreted according to CLSI susceptibility breakpoints and compared by regression analysis.Results: in general, the essential agreement (+/- 1-log(2)) between M. I. C. E. and CLSI agar dilution was 93.0%, 84.0% and 77.0% for linezolid, teicoplanin and vancomycin, respectively. Essential agreement rates between M. I. C. E. and Etest were excellent (>90.0%) for all antibiotics tested. Both strips (M. I. C. E. and Etest) yielded two very major errors for linezolid. Unacceptable minor rates were observed for teicoplanin against CoNS and for vancomycin against S. aureus.Conclusions: According to our results, linezolid and teicoplanin MICs against all staphylococci and S. aureus, respectively, were more accurately predicted by M. I. C. E. strips. However, the Etest showed better performance than M. I. C. E. for predicting vancomycin MICs against all staphylococci. Thus, microbiologists must be aware of the different performance of commercially available gradient strips against staphylococci.Universidade Federal de São Paulo, Lab Alerta, Disciplina Infectol, São Paulo, BrazilUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Hosp São Paulo, Lab Cent, São Paulo, BrazilUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Lab Alerta, Disciplina Infectol, São Paulo, BrazilUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Hosp São Paulo, Lab Cent, São Paulo, BrazilWeb of ScienceThermo Fisher Scientific, São Paulo, BrazilConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)CNPq: 307816/2009-5Public Library ScienceUniversidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)Campana, Eloiza Helena [UNIFESP]Carvalhaes, Cecília Godoy [UNIFESP]Nonato, Bruna [UNIFESP]Machado, Antônia Maria de Oliveira [UNIFESP]Gales, Ana Cristina [UNIFESP]2016-01-24T14:37:07Z2016-01-24T14:37:07Z2014-04-14info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion5application/pdfhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0094627Plos One. San Francisco: Public Library Science, v. 9, n. 4, 5 p., 2014.10.1371/journal.pone.0094627WOS000336970400059.pdf1932-6203http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/37663WOS:000336970400059engPlos Oneinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNIFESPinstname:Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)instacron:UNIFESP2024-08-08T08:46:32Zoai:repositorio.unifesp.br/:11600/37663Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://www.repositorio.unifesp.br/oai/requestbiblioteca.csp@unifesp.bropendoar:34652024-08-08T08:46:32Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Comparison of MICE and Etest with CLSI Agar Dilution for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing against Oxacillin-Resistant Staphylococcus spp. |
title |
Comparison of MICE and Etest with CLSI Agar Dilution for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing against Oxacillin-Resistant Staphylococcus spp. |
spellingShingle |
Comparison of MICE and Etest with CLSI Agar Dilution for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing against Oxacillin-Resistant Staphylococcus spp. Campana, Eloiza Helena [UNIFESP] |
title_short |
Comparison of MICE and Etest with CLSI Agar Dilution for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing against Oxacillin-Resistant Staphylococcus spp. |
title_full |
Comparison of MICE and Etest with CLSI Agar Dilution for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing against Oxacillin-Resistant Staphylococcus spp. |
title_fullStr |
Comparison of MICE and Etest with CLSI Agar Dilution for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing against Oxacillin-Resistant Staphylococcus spp. |
title_full_unstemmed |
Comparison of MICE and Etest with CLSI Agar Dilution for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing against Oxacillin-Resistant Staphylococcus spp. |
title_sort |
Comparison of MICE and Etest with CLSI Agar Dilution for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing against Oxacillin-Resistant Staphylococcus spp. |
author |
Campana, Eloiza Helena [UNIFESP] |
author_facet |
Campana, Eloiza Helena [UNIFESP] Carvalhaes, Cecília Godoy [UNIFESP] Nonato, Bruna [UNIFESP] Machado, Antônia Maria de Oliveira [UNIFESP] Gales, Ana Cristina [UNIFESP] |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Carvalhaes, Cecília Godoy [UNIFESP] Nonato, Bruna [UNIFESP] Machado, Antônia Maria de Oliveira [UNIFESP] Gales, Ana Cristina [UNIFESP] |
author2_role |
author author author author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Campana, Eloiza Helena [UNIFESP] Carvalhaes, Cecília Godoy [UNIFESP] Nonato, Bruna [UNIFESP] Machado, Antônia Maria de Oliveira [UNIFESP] Gales, Ana Cristina [UNIFESP] |
description |
Objective: the main objective of this study was to comparatively evaluate the performance of M. I. C. E. and Etest methodologies to that of agar dilution for determining the antimicrobial susceptibility profile of oxacillin-resistant Staphylococcus spp.Methods: A total of 100 oxacillin-resistant Staphylococcus spp. isolates were collected from hospitalized patients at a teaching hospital. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing for vancomycin, teicoplanin and linezolid was performed using the reference CLSI agar dilution method (2009), Etest and M. I. C. E. methodologies. the MIC values were interpreted according to CLSI susceptibility breakpoints and compared by regression analysis.Results: in general, the essential agreement (+/- 1-log(2)) between M. I. C. E. and CLSI agar dilution was 93.0%, 84.0% and 77.0% for linezolid, teicoplanin and vancomycin, respectively. Essential agreement rates between M. I. C. E. and Etest were excellent (>90.0%) for all antibiotics tested. Both strips (M. I. C. E. and Etest) yielded two very major errors for linezolid. Unacceptable minor rates were observed for teicoplanin against CoNS and for vancomycin against S. aureus.Conclusions: According to our results, linezolid and teicoplanin MICs against all staphylococci and S. aureus, respectively, were more accurately predicted by M. I. C. E. strips. However, the Etest showed better performance than M. I. C. E. for predicting vancomycin MICs against all staphylococci. Thus, microbiologists must be aware of the different performance of commercially available gradient strips against staphylococci. |
publishDate |
2014 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2014-04-14 2016-01-24T14:37:07Z 2016-01-24T14:37:07Z |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0094627 Plos One. San Francisco: Public Library Science, v. 9, n. 4, 5 p., 2014. 10.1371/journal.pone.0094627 WOS000336970400059.pdf 1932-6203 http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/37663 WOS:000336970400059 |
url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0094627 http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/37663 |
identifier_str_mv |
Plos One. San Francisco: Public Library Science, v. 9, n. 4, 5 p., 2014. 10.1371/journal.pone.0094627 WOS000336970400059.pdf 1932-6203 WOS:000336970400059 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
Plos One |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
5 application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Public Library Science |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Public Library Science |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP instname:Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) instacron:UNIFESP |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) |
instacron_str |
UNIFESP |
institution |
UNIFESP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
biblioteca.csp@unifesp.br |
_version_ |
1814268376197890048 |