Bianchini H, Canigia L F, Predari S C, Rollet R, Litterio M, Berestein P, Castello L, De Martino A, Greco G, Hardie N
Department of Clinical Analyses, Laboratory of Microbiology, Centre of Medical Education and Clinical Research (CEMIC), Billingshurst 2447, (1425), Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Anaerobe. 1997 Aug;3(4):225-31. doi: 10.1006/anae.1997.0110.
A collaborative study involving seven laboratories was undertaken to evaluate the reproducibility and the reliability of the broth disk elution test against anaerobic bacteria by comparing with the reference agar dilution method. A two breakpoint broth test was also evaluated. Assays were performed using the same testing conditions (i.e. medium, temperature, atmosphere and incubation time). One hundred Gram-negative and Gram-positive clinical isolates were initially studied. Overall agreement of 98.5% and 97.5%, were found for disk elution and the two breakpoint tests, respectively. In order to assess the reliability of the disk elution test, two different lots (LOT1 and LOT2) of disks of piperacillin and clindamycin were selected, to obtain two final concentrations after dilution (10 and 60 mg/mL; 1 and 4 mg/mL, respectively). Two hundred and eighty assays were performed against one strain of both Bacteroides fragilis(piperacillin MIC, 8.0 mg/mL; clindamycin MIC, <0.5 mg/mL) and Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron(piperacillin MIC, 16.0 mg/mL; clindamycin MIC, <0.5 mg/mL). With LOT 1, considering both species and both antibiotics, the agreement among six laboratories ranged from 85% to 100% (P > 0.05) with the higher concentration. Overall agreement among all laboratories was 91%. No optimal agreement (>90%) for clindamycin-Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron using the LOT1 (77%) was found. Since this finding was not observed with LOT2 (100% agreement), discrepancies were attributed to variation between lots. Overall agreement with LOT2 was 100% for all centres. The present study indicates that the broth disk elution method proved to be a reliable and suitable alternative for routine susceptibility testing for anaerobic bacteria, as a resistance screening method for clinical purposes.
开展了一项涉及七个实验室的合作研究,通过与参考琼脂稀释法比较,评估肉汤纸片洗脱试验针对厌氧菌的可重复性和可靠性。还对一种双断点肉汤试验进行了评估。检测在相同的试验条件下(即培养基、温度、气体环境和孵育时间)进行。最初研究了100株革兰氏阴性和革兰氏阳性临床分离株。纸片洗脱试验和双断点试验的总体一致性分别为98.5%和97.5%。为了评估纸片洗脱试验的可靠性,选择了哌拉西林和克林霉素两种不同批次(批次1和批次2)的纸片,稀释后分别获得两种终浓度(分别为10和60mg/mL;1和4mg/mL)。针对脆弱拟杆菌(哌拉西林MIC为8.0mg/mL;克林霉素MIC<0.5mg/mL)和多形拟杆菌(哌拉西林MIC为16.0mg/mL;克林霉素MIC<0.5mg/mL)的一个菌株进行了280次检测。对于批次1,考虑两种菌和两种抗生素,六个实验室在较高浓度下的一致性范围为85%至100%(P>0.05)。所有实验室的总体一致性为91%。使用批次1时,未发现克林霉素与多形拟杆菌有最佳一致性(>90%)(一致性为77%)。由于在批次2中未观察到这一结果(一致性为100%),差异归因于批次间的变异。所有中心使用批次2的总体一致性为100%。本研究表明,肉汤纸片洗脱法被证明是一种可靠且合适的替代方法,可用于厌氧菌的常规药敏试验,作为临床耐药性筛查方法。