Literature DB >> 18505206

Comparison of agar dilution and E-test for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Campylobacter coil isolates recovered from 80 Ontario swine farms.

Norma P Varela1, Robert Friendship, Cate Dewey, Alfonso Valdivieso.   

Abstract

The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the level of agreement of the E-test for in vitro antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Campylobacter coli using the agar dilution technique, which is the approved method. A convenience sample of 80 Ontario swine farms was chosen for this study; each farm was visited from January to June 2004. A total of 233 isolates of C. coli were tested for susceptibility to 10 antimicrobials by agar dilution and the E-test. Performance of the tests was evaluated using 7 quality control strains: Escherichia coli ATCC 25922, Staphylococcus aureus ATCC 29213, Campylobacter jejuni ATCC 33560, and Campylobacter coli ATCC 33559 for the E-test and E. coli ATCC 25922, Pseudomonas aeruginosa ATCC 27853, and C. jejuni ATCC 33560 for the agar dilution test. Weighted Cohen's kappa and prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted kappa (PABAK) tests were used for statistical analysis. The E-test and agar dilution test results had a strong agreement when resistance to streptomycin and tetracycline were evaluated (weighted kappa: 0.68 and 0.66, respectively). However, marked disagreement was detected when testing susceptibility to nalidixic acid and ampicillin (0.15 and 0.22, respectively). Almost perfect agreement was detected by PABAK when testing susceptibility to gentamicin (0.99). Agreement was found to be moderate for ciprofloxacin, azithromycin, clindamycin, erythromycin, and chloramphenicol. Although the level of agreement between the E-test and agar dilution depended on the antimicrobial being tested, the E-test always detected a lower proportion of resistant isolates compared to agar dilution.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18505206      PMCID: PMC2276902     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can J Vet Res        ISSN: 0830-9000            Impact factor:   1.310


  15 in total

1.  The E-Test and Campylobacter jejuni.

Authors:  C N Baker
Journal:  Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 2.803

2.  Comparison of broth microdilution, E Test, and agar dilution methods for antibiotic susceptibility testing of Campylobacter jejuni and Campylobacter coli.

Authors:  Petra Luber; Edda Bartelt; Elke Genschow; Jutta Wagner; Helmut Hahn
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-02-08       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Bias, prevalence and kappa.

Authors:  T Byrt; J Bishop; J B Carlin
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1993-05       Impact factor: 6.437

Review 5.  Antimicrobial susceptibility testing for Helicobacter pylori: sensitivity test results and their clinical relevance.

Authors:  M S Osato
Journal:  Curr Pharm Des       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 3.116

6.  Development of a standardized susceptibility test for campylobacter with quality-control ranges for ciprofloxacin, doxycycline, erythromycin, gentamicin, and meropenem.

Authors:  P F McDermott; S M Bodeis; F M Aarestrup; S Brown; M Traczewski; P Fedorka-Cray; M Wallace; I A Critchley; C Thornsberry; S Graff; R Flamm; J Beyer; D Shortridge; L J Piddock; V Ricci; M M Johnson; R N Jones; B Reller; S Mirrett; J Aldrobi; R Rennie; C Brosnikoff; L Turnbull; G Stein; S Schooley; R A Hanson; R D Walker
Journal:  Microb Drug Resist       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 3.431

7.  Antimicrobial susceptibility of equine and environmental isolates of Clostridium difficile.

Authors:  V Båverud; A Gunnarsson; M Karlsson; A Franklin
Journal:  Microb Drug Resist       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 3.431

8.  Comparison of the Etest and agar dilution for in vitro antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Campylobacter.

Authors:  Beilei Ge; Sonya Bodeis; Robert D Walker; David G White; Shaohua Zhao; Patrick F McDermott; Jianghong Meng
Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 5.790

9.  Cost analysis and antimicrobial susceptibility testing comparing the E test and the agar dilution method in Campylobacter jejuni and Campylobacter coli.

Authors:  Alfonso Valdivieso-García; Ryan Imgrund; Anne Deckert; Betsy Marie Varughese; Kathleen Harris; Natalie Bunimov; Richard Reid-Smith; Scott McEwen
Journal:  Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 2.803

10.  Enteric illness in Ontario, Canada, from 1997 to 2001.

Authors:  Marilyn B Lee; Dean Middleton
Journal:  J Food Prot       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 2.077

View more
  4 in total

1.  Inaccuracy of the disk diffusion method compared with the agar dilution method for susceptibility testing of Campylobacter spp.

Authors:  Mirva Lehtopolku; Pirkko Kotilainen; Pauli Puukka; Ulla-Maija Nakari; Anja Siitonen; Erkki Eerola; Pentti Huovinen; Antti J Hakanen
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2011-11-09       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Rapid antibiotic sensitivity testing in microwell arrays.

Authors:  Fatemeh Jalali; Felix Ellett; Daniel Irimia
Journal:  Technology (Singap World Sci)       Date:  2017-05-16

3.  Influence of tetracycline resistance on the transport of manure-derived Escherichia coli in saturated porous media.

Authors:  Jacob J Walczak; Sonia L Bardy; Lucia Feriancikova; Shangping Xu
Journal:  Water Res       Date:  2010-12-21       Impact factor: 11.236

Review 4.  Commercial Essential Oils as Potential Antimicrobials to Treat Skin Diseases.

Authors:  Ané Orchard; Sandy van Vuuren
Journal:  Evid Based Complement Alternat Med       Date:  2017-05-04       Impact factor: 2.629

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.