Literature DB >> 20567868

Comparison of daptomycin Etest MICs on Mueller Hinton, IsoSensitest and brain heart infusion agars from Europe against 20 Staphylococcus aureus isolates.

L M Koeth1, J M DiFranco.   

Abstract

The Etest manufacturer (bioMerieux) recommends Mueller-Hinton agar (MHA) with calcium concentration of 25-40 mg/L for daptomycin testing. A two phase study was performed to evaluate the effect of European agars on daptomycin Etest MICs. Broth microdilution (BMD) testing was performed and compared to Etest MICs for a challenge set of 20 Staphylococcus aureus with daptomycin MICs near the susceptible breakpoint and S. aureus 29213. In the first phase, Etest MICs were determined using agar plates prepared from MHA, IsoSensitest Agar (ISA) and Brain-Heart Infusion Agar (BHIA) and supplemented with various levels of calcium. In the second phase, Etest MICs were determined using commercially prepared MHA from Mast (MST), BD, Oxoid (OX), BioRad (BR), bioMerieux (BM) and E&O (EO) and ISA plates from OX, EO and MST. The calcium concentration of each agar was determined using ion selective electrode methodology. The best correlation of Etest and BMD MICs was obtained in phase 1 using MHA with 42.8 mg/L calcium and in phase 2 with BD MHA. The phase 2 MHA calcium concentration ranged from 19.2 to 63.6 mg/L. 87.5% of strains with BMD MICs of 1 mg/L, had Etest MICs of 1.5 or 2 mg/L using MHA with recommended calcium levels. Etest MICs using BHIA and ISA were higher than the BMD MICs and therefore are not recommended for use with the daptomycin Etest. The high percentage of major errors using Etest in this study, even with use of the most optimal medium, suggests that Etest MICs of 1.5 or 2 mg/L using MHA should be retested by BMD.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20567868     DOI: 10.1007/s10096-010-0996-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis        ISSN: 0934-9723            Impact factor:   3.267


  2 in total

1.  Evaluation of the in vitro activity of daptomycin against 19615 clinical isolates of Gram-positive cocci collected in North American hospitals (2002-2005).

Authors:  Michael A Pfaller; Helio S Sader; Ronald N Jones
Journal:  Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2007-01-19       Impact factor: 2.803

2.  Comparison of daptomycin MIC results by DIN, NCCLS, SFM, and SRGA methods for 297 Gram-positive organisms.

Authors:  Laura M Koeth; Roland Leclercq; Barbro Olsson-Liljequist
Journal:  Int J Antimicrob Agents       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 5.283

  2 in total
  4 in total

1.  Correlation between mutations in liaFSR of Enterococcus faecium and MIC of daptomycin: revisiting daptomycin breakpoints.

Authors:  Jose M Munita; Diana Panesso; Lorena Diaz; Truc T Tran; Jinnethe Reyes; Audrey Wanger; Barbara E Murray; Cesar A Arias
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2012-06-04       Impact factor: 5.191

2.  False daptomycin-nonsusceptible MIC results by Microscan panel PC 29 relative to Etest results for Staphylococcus aureus and enterococci.

Authors:  Elizabeth L Palavecino; Jacqueline M Burnell
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2012-10-17       Impact factor: 5.948

Review 3.  A current perspective on daptomycin for the clinical microbiologist.

Authors:  Romney M Humphries; Simon Pollett; George Sakoulas
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 26.132

4.  Development of a Broth Microdilution Method for Exebacase Susceptibility Testing.

Authors:  Jun T Oh; Jane E Ambler; Cara Cassino; Raymond Schuch
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2021-06-17       Impact factor: 5.191

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.