Huang M B, Baker C N, Banerjee S, Tenover F C
Nosocomial Pathogens Laboratory Branch, National Center for Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control, Atlanta, Georgia 30333.
J Clin Microbiol. 1992 Dec;30(12):3243-8. doi: 10.1128/jcm.30.12.3243-3248.1992.
We compared the results of the E test MIC method with the results of agar dilution susceptibility testing for 18 antimicrobial agents against 324 strains of gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria, including 99 strains of staphylococci, 101 strains of antimicrobial-resistant gram-negative bacteria, 40 strains of enterococci, and 84 isolates of Campylobacter jejuni. Overall agreement of MICs (+/- 1 log2 dilution) was 97.3% for staphylococci, 94.6% for gram-negative bacilli, and 100.0% for enterococci. The MIC results for C. jejuni showed an overall agreement of only 82.9%. This was due primarily to a number of offscale values that limited the number of comparisons with clindamycin, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, and tetracycline. Interpretative criteria for the results of the two test methods, however, were similar. Overall, the E test produced MIC results comparable to those of agar dilution when multiresistant organisms were tested. However, it was necessary to add 2% NaCl to the agar when testing oxacillin against staphylococci for both the E test and agar dilution to obtain results comparable to those of the broth microdilution method.
我们将Etest MIC法的结果与琼脂稀释药敏试验的结果进行了比较,使用18种抗菌药物对324株革兰氏阳性和革兰氏阴性细菌进行检测,其中包括99株葡萄球菌、101株耐抗菌药物的革兰氏阴性菌、40株肠球菌以及84株空肠弯曲菌分离株。葡萄球菌的MIC总体一致性(±1个log2稀释度)为97.3%,革兰氏阴性杆菌为94.6%,肠球菌为100.0%。空肠弯曲菌的MIC结果总体一致性仅为82.9%。这主要是由于一些超出范围的值限制了与克林霉素、甲氧苄啶-磺胺甲恶唑和四环素进行比较的数量。然而,两种检测方法结果的解释标准相似。总体而言,在检测多重耐药菌时,Etest产生的MIC结果与琼脂稀释法相当。但是,在使用Etest和琼脂稀释法检测苯唑西林对葡萄球菌的药敏时,有必要在琼脂中添加2%氯化钠,以获得与肉汤微量稀释法相当的结果。