Méndez Carmen Castro, Serrano Maria Carmen, Valverde Anastasio, Pemán Javier, Almeida Carmen, Martín-Mazuelos Estrella
Servicio de Microbiología Clínica y Parasitología Clínica, Hospital Universitario de Valme, Cádiz, Ctra, Spain.
Med Mycol. 2008 Mar;46(2):119-23. doi: 10.1080/13693780701670491.
We compared two agar-based methods, the E-test and the disk diffusion method with the Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) reference broth microdilution method (CLSI M38-A; MD). Forty six dermatophytes strains including 30 Trichophyton mentagrophytes, 8 T. rubrum and 8 M. gypseum were tested against three antifungal agents, i.e., fluconazole (FLC), itraconazole (ITC) and voriconazole (VRC). The level of agreement between the E-test and MD (+/-2 dilutions) was 45.6% for fluconazole, 19.5% for itraconazole and 52.1% for voriconazole. The results obtained with disk diffusion had low correlation with the results obtained by the CLSI broth microdilution reference method with azoles.
我们将两种基于琼脂的方法（E-test法和纸片扩散法）与临床实验室标准协会（CLSI）的参考肉汤微量稀释法（CLSI M38-A；MD）进行了比较。对46株皮肤癣菌进行了测试，其中包括30株须癣毛癣菌、8株红色毛癣菌和8株石膏样小孢子菌，测试针对三种抗真菌剂，即氟康唑（FLC）、伊曲康唑（ITC）和伏立康唑（VRC）。E-test法与MD法（±2个稀释度）之间的一致性水平，氟康唑为45.6%，伊曲康唑为19.5%，伏立康唑为52.1%。纸片扩散法得到的结果与CLSI肉汤微量稀释参考方法对唑类药物得到的结果相关性较低。
