Comparison of the Etest and Sensititre methods for anaerobe susceptibility testing

Karin Puechler, Katia Scalzo, Maira Nicoletti, Stefanie Wieser,Richard Aschbacher,Elisabetta Pagani

Microbiologia Medica(2023)

引用 0|浏览0
暂无评分
摘要
Background and Aims: Antimicrobial susceptibility testing of anaerobic clinical isolates is of paramount importance for patient therapy and resistance monitoring. In our laboratory the MIC gradient Etest method and broth microdilution with Sensititre trays are used for susceptibility testing of anaerobes and the aim of this study was to compare the two methods on a panel of anaerobes routinely isolated from patients in the province of Bolzano, Italy. Materials and Methods: Totally, 74 non-repetitive Gram-positive and Gram-negative patient isolates were tested with Etest strips on Fastidious Anaerobe Agar (F.A.A.) and with Sensititre trays, according to manufacturer’s instructions. Interpretation of MICs was by EUCAST or CLSI criteria, resistance percentages were calculated and Categorical Agreement (CA) and Essential Agreement (EA) between the two methods were determined. Results: Of the 74 isolates, 68 (91.9%) grew on both systems and agreement for these was compared in the study. CA for all isolates was ≥90% for all tested antibiotics except moxifloxacin, whereas EA was generally lower. Resistance was generally low, except for clindamycin in all isolates and tigecycline in Gram-negatives. In our study Etest was a superior and more handy method. Conclusions: To conclude, we believe the Etest method is more suitable for routine diagnostic laboratory usage. Nevertheless, multicenter studies are required to evaluate the two methods for anaerobic susceptibility testing.
更多
查看译文
关键词
anaerobes,bacteroides,clostridium,Etest,Sensititre,agreement
AI 理解论文
溯源树
样例
生成溯源树,研究论文发展脉络
Chat Paper
正在生成论文摘要