Wexler H M, Finegold S M
Research Service, VA Wadsworth Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
J Chemother. 1991 Feb;3 Suppl 2:12-9.
Although ceftizoxime has been used effectively in several clinical trials for infections involving anaerobic bacteria, reports of its in-vitro activity against anaerobes are contradictory and confusing. In an effort to clarify the discrepant reports, we tested 90 strains of Bacteroides fragilis group organisms from patients with perforated or gangrenous appendicitis using eight different susceptibility testing procedures. The minimal inhibitory concentration values were dependent on the technique used; agar dilution values were often four twofold dilutions higher than microbroth dilution values. Agar techniques (including spiral gradient end point) gave values of 36% to 61% susceptible at breakpoint (depending on the technique), while the microbroth dilution techniques gave values of 84% to 92% susceptible. When a 64 micrograms/ml breakpoint for agar dilution testing was used, the methods were more comparable, with the agar methods giving values of 64% to 83% susceptible. The results of the broth disk elution procedure were difficult to read and often did not agree with other values.
尽管头孢唑肟已在多项涉及厌氧菌感染的临床试验中有效使用，但其对厌氧菌体外活性的报道相互矛盾且令人困惑。为了澄清这些相互矛盾的报道，我们使用八种不同的药敏试验方法，对90株来自穿孔性或坏疽性阑尾炎患者的脆弱拟杆菌属菌群进行了检测。最低抑菌浓度值取决于所使用的技术；琼脂稀释法的值通常比微量肉汤稀释法的值高四个两倍稀释度。琼脂技术（包括螺旋梯度终点法）在断点处的敏感率为36%至61%（取决于技术），而微量肉汤稀释技术的敏感率为84%至92%。当琼脂稀释试验的断点设定为64微克/毫升时，两种方法的结果更具可比性，琼脂法的敏感率为64%至83%。肉汤纸片洗脱法的结果难以读取，且常常与其他值不一致。
