Literature DB >> 22238439

First comprehensive evaluation of the M.I.C. evaluator device compared to Etest and CLSI reference dilution methods for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of clinical strains of anaerobes and other fastidious bacterial species.

R P Rennie1, L Turnbull, C Brosnikoff, J Cloke.   

Abstract

The new M.I.C. Evaluator strip uses test methodology and the recording of results that are similar to those of Etest. For this first assessment, 102 clinical strains of anaerobic bacteria from 12 genera and 155 strains from 7 genera and 8 species of fastidious bacteria were tested by M.I.C. Evaluator, Etest, and agar dilution or broth microdilution as a reference standard. Ampicillin, amoxicillin, amoxicillin-clavulanate, cefotaxime, ciprofloxacin, erythromycin, imipenem, levofloxacin, metronidazole, penicillin, and tetracycline were tested depending on the species. Agar dilution for anaerobes was performed according to CLSI document M11-A7. For the fastidious bacteria, CLSI document M45-A2 was followed. For the anaerobes, essential and categorical agreement between M.I.C. Evaluator and Etest was >90%. Compared to agar dilution, essential agreement was low for both strip tests, and many very major errors were observed for metronidazole (13 to 14%) and penicillin (8 to 9%) with isolates from the Bacteroides fragilis group and Clostridium species. For fastidious species, essential agreements for M.I.C. Evaluator and Etest plus or minus one doubling dilution were >95%. Compared to broth microdilution, essential agreements were low (40 to 90%) plus or minus one dilution and were >90% plus or minus two dilutions, with high overall category agreement (CA). Major and minor errors were within established parameters for all strains tested. The M.I.C. Evaluator strips were equivalent to Etest for anaerobes and fastidious species. These observations require further investigation to determine which methods provide the most accurate MIC for clinical utility. The further evaluation of additional M.I.C. Evaluator agents will be performed as they become available.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22238439      PMCID: PMC3318539          DOI: 10.1128/JCM.05397-11

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Microbiol        ISSN: 0095-1137            Impact factor:   5.948


  24 in total

1.  Antimicrobial susceptibilities of strains of Neisseria gonorrhoeae in Bangkok, Thailand: 1994-1995.

Authors:  J S Knapp; C Wongba; K Limpakarnjanarat; N L Young; M C Parekh; S W Neal; A Buatiang; A Chitwarakorn; T D Mastro
Journal:  Sex Transm Dis       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 2.830

Review 2.  Susceptibility testing of anaerobic bacteria.

Authors:  J E Rosenblatt
Journal:  Clin Lab Med       Date:  1989-06       Impact factor: 1.935

3.  Performance accuracy of antibacterial and antifungal susceptibility test methods: report from the College of American Pathologists Microbiology Surveys Program (2001-2003).

Authors:  Michael A Pfaller; Ronald N Jones
Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 5.534

4.  Perspective on susceptibility testing of anaerobic bacteria.

Authors:  S M Finegold
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 9.079

5.  Evaluation of susceptibility of anaerobic organisms by the Etest and the reference agar dilution method.

Authors:  B C Schieven; V E Massey; R Lannigan; Z Hussain
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 9.079

Review 6.  Haemophilus influenzae: antibiotic susceptibility.

Authors:  C A Needham
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  1988-04       Impact factor: 26.132

7.  Evaluation of the Etest for susceptibility testing of anaerobic bacteria.

Authors:  J E Rosenblatt; D R Gustafson
Journal:  Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 2.803

8.  Evaluation of the Etest for antimicrobial spectrum and potency determinations of anaerobes associated with bacterial vaginosis and peritonitis.

Authors:  J L Croco; M E Erwin; J M Jennings; L R Putnam; R N Jones
Journal:  Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 2.803

9.  Comparison of Etest and National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards broth macrodilution method for antifungal susceptibility testing: enhanced ability to detect amphotericin B-resistant Candida isolates.

Authors:  A Wanger; K Mills; P W Nelson; J H Rex
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 10.  Fluoroquinolone resistance in Neisseria gonorrhoeae.

Authors:  J S Knapp; K K Fox; D L Trees; W L Whittington
Journal:  Emerg Infect Dis       Date:  1997 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 6.883

View more
  14 in total

1.  Frequency of resistance in obligate anaerobic bacteria isolated from dogs, cats, and horses to antimicrobial agents.

Authors:  S D Lawhon; A Taylor; V R Fajt
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2013-09-11       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Eggerthella lenta bacteremia complicated by spondylodiscitis, psoas abscess, and meningitis.

Authors:  B J Gardiner; T M Korman; R K Junckerstorff
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2014-01-15       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  Evaluation of agar dilution and broth microdilution methods to determine the disinfectant susceptibility.

Authors:  Guoyan Wu; Qianru Yang; Mei Long; Lijuan Guo; Bei Li; Yue Meng; Anyun Zhang; Hongning Wang; Shuliang Liu; Likou Zou
Journal:  J Antibiot (Tokyo)       Date:  2015-05-06       Impact factor: 2.649

4.  Haemophilus influenzae with Non-Beta-Lactamase-Mediated Beta-Lactam Resistance: Easy To Find but Hard To Categorize.

Authors:  Dagfinn Skaare; Astrid Lia; Anja Hannisdal; Yngvar Tveten; Erika Matuschek; Gunnar Kahlmeter; Bjørn-Erik Kristiansen
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2015-09-09       Impact factor: 5.948

5.  First comprehensive evaluation of the M.I.C. evaluator device compared to Etest and CLSI broth microdilution for MIC testing of aerobic Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacterial species.

Authors:  R P Rennie; L Turnbull; C Brosnikoff; J Cloke
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2012-01-11       Impact factor: 5.948

Review 6.  Time for Some Group Therapy: Update on Identification, Antimicrobial Resistance, Taxonomy, and Clinical Significance of the Bacteroides fragilis Group.

Authors:  Sophonie Jean; Miranda J Wallace; Gautam Dantas; Carey-Ann D Burnham
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2022-06-14       Impact factor: 11.677

7.  Case-control study on the role of enterotoxigenic Bacteroides fragilis as a cause of diarrhea among children in Kolkata, India.

Authors:  Dharanidharan Ramamurthy; Gururaja P Pazhani; Anirban Sarkar; Ranjan K Nandy; Krishnan Rajendran; Dipika Sur; Bamkesh Manna; Thandavarayan Ramamurthy
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-04-05       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Evaluation of Antibiotic Susceptibility of Gram-Positive Anaerobic Cocci Isolated from Cancer Patients of the N. N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center.

Authors:  Irina I Shilnikova; Natalia V Dmitrieva
Journal:  J Pathog       Date:  2015-12-21

9.  Comparison of M.I.C.E. and Etest with CLSI agar dilution for antimicrobial susceptibility testing against oxacillin-resistant Staphylococcus spp.

Authors:  Eloiza H Campana; Cecilia G Carvalhaes; Bruna Nonato; Antonia M de O Machado; Ana C Gales
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-04-14       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Antimicrobial resistant coliform bacteria in the Gomti river water and determination of their tolerance level.

Authors:  Asma Akhter; Mohd Imran; Firoz Akhter
Journal:  Bioinformation       Date:  2014-04-23
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.