Nayak Rajesh, Call Veronica, Kaldhone Pravin, Tyler Cynthia, Anderson Gwendolyn, Phillips Sarah, Kerdahi Khalil, Foley Steven L
National Center for Toxicological Research, United States Food and Drug Administration, Jefferson, Arkansas, USA.
Clin Med Res. 2007 Jun;5(2):98-105. doi: 10.3121/cmr.2007.725.
Disk diffusion and broth dilution assays are conventionally used for antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) of bacteria. The goal of this study was to determine the correlation of results from different AST methods for the Salmonella enterica serovar Heidelberg.
S. enterica serovar Heidelberg (n=105) strains were tested using 4 different AST methods: agar disk diffusion, broth microdilution using Sensititre with the NARMS (CMV1AGNF) panel, manual broth microdilution and Vitek with GNS-207 cards.
AST was performed using standardized methods and Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute recommended quality control organisms. Eight drugs were common to all testing methods including amikacin, amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, ampicillin, chloramphenicol, ciprofloxacin, gentamicin, tetracycline and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole.
No resistance to amikacin and ciprofloxacin was detected. Overall, the agreement of the AST results among all four methods for the drugs tested was: amikacin (100%), amoxicillin/clavulanic acid (96.1%), ampicillin (97.1%), chloramphenicol (96.2%), ciprofloxacin (100%), gentamicin (80.0%), tetracycline (80.0%) and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (94.3%). There was 97.1%, 95.5% and 98.0% overall agreement between the reference diffusion method and the manual broth microdilution, Sensititre microdilution and Vitek methods, respectively.
The study indicated that AST methods correlated with one another when testing S. enterica serovar Heidelberg isolates, with a few exceptions. In general, discrepancies among the methods were due to isolates being interpreted as intermediately susceptible or due to an increased number of resistances detected with Sensititre and a lower number with Vitek.
纸片扩散法和肉汤稀释法是常规用于细菌抗菌药物敏感性试验(AST)的方法。本研究的目的是确定肠炎沙门氏菌海德堡血清型不同AST方法结果之间的相关性。
使用4种不同的AST方法对肠炎沙门氏菌海德堡血清型(n = 105)菌株进行检测:琼脂纸片扩散法、使用含NARMS(CMV1AGNF)平板的Sensititre肉汤微量稀释法、手工肉汤微量稀释法以及使用GNS - 207卡的Vitek法。
使用标准化方法和临床与实验室标准协会推荐的质量控制菌株进行AST。所有检测方法都使用8种药物,包括阿米卡星、阿莫西林/克拉维酸、氨苄西林、氯霉素、环丙沙星、庆大霉素、四环素和甲氧苄啶/磺胺甲恶唑。
未检测到对阿米卡星和环丙沙星的耐药性。总体而言,所有四种方法对所测药物的AST结果一致性为:阿米卡星(100%)、阿莫西林/克拉维酸(96.1%)、氨苄西林(97.1%)、氯霉素(96.2%)、环丙沙星(100%)、庆大霉素(80.0%)、四环素(80.0%)和甲氧苄啶/磺胺甲恶唑(94.3%)。参考扩散法与手工肉汤微量稀释法、Sensititre微量稀释法和Vitek法之间的总体一致性分别为97.1%、95.5%和98.0%。
该研究表明,在检测肠炎沙门氏菌海德堡血清型分离株时,AST方法之间相互关联,但有一些例外。一般来说,方法之间的差异是由于分离株被解释为中度敏感,或者是由于Sensititre检测到的耐药性增加而Vitek检测到的耐药性较少。