Suppr超能文献

Etest 法检测两性霉素 B 和卡泊芬净对酵母菌体外敏感性的实验室间重复性和与 CLSI 方法的比较。

Interlaboratory reproducibility of Etest amphotericin B and caspofungin yeast susceptibility testing and comparison with the CLSI method.

机构信息

Parasitology and Mycology, CHU Timone, Aix-Marseille Université, Marseille, France.

出版信息

J Clin Microbiol. 2012 Jul;50(7):2305-9. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00490-12. Epub 2012 May 2.

Abstract

This study aimed to assess the interlaboratory reproducibility at four university hospital laboratories in the southeast region of France of the Etest technique for the determination of caspofungin (CAS) and amphotericin B (AMB) MICs and to compare it to the CLSI broth microdilution reference method. Consecutive clinical yeast isolates (n = 198) were included in the study. AMB and CAS MICs were read at 24 and 48 h. Interlaboratory reproducibility was estimated by using (i) an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), (ii) essential agreement (EA), and (iii) categorical agreement (CA). For Etest interlaboratory reproducibility for CAS, ICCs were 0.80 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76 to 0.84) and 0.81 (95% CI, 0.77 to 0.85) at 24 and 48 h, respectively. For AMB, the ICCs were 0.51 (95% CI, 0.43 to 0.58) and 0.69 (95% CI, 0.63 to 0.74) at 24 and 48 h, respectively. At 48 h, the between-center EAs ranged from 94.4 to 99.0% for both antifungals. For the comparison of the CLSI method and the Etest, the between-technique ICCs were 0.69 (95% CI, 0.63 to 0.74) and 0.62 (95% CI, 0.55 to 0.68) for CAS and AMB, respectively. The EAs ranged from 76.5 to 98.5% for CAS and from 90.3 to 97.4% for AMB according to the centers. CAs ranged from 87.9% to 91.4%, with four very major errors for 2 strains (1 Candida albicans strain and 1 Candida krusei strain), for CAS and from 97.5 to 99.5%, with four major errors, for AMB. In conclusion, the Etest showed a good interlaboratory reproducibility and a good correlation with the CLSI technique. It is well suited for the routine clinical laboratory and can thus be used to monitor clinical yeast isolates' in vitro susceptibilities in this setting.

摘要

本研究旨在评估法国东南部四家大学医院实验室中 Etest 技术测定卡泊芬净 (CAS) 和两性霉素 B (AMB) MIC 的实验室间重现性,并将其与 CLSI 肉汤微量稀释参考方法进行比较。研究纳入了连续的临床酵母分离株 (n = 198)。在 24 和 48 小时时读取 AMB 和 CAS MIC。使用 (i) 组内相关系数 (ICC)、(ii) 基本一致性 (EA) 和 (iii) 分类一致性 (CA) 来评估实验室间重现性。对于 Etest 测定 CAS 的实验室间重现性,24 小时和 48 小时的 ICC 分别为 0.80(95%置信区间[CI],0.76 至 0.84)和 0.81(95% CI,0.77 至 0.85)。对于 AMB,24 小时和 48 小时的 ICC 分别为 0.51(95% CI,0.43 至 0.58)和 0.69(95% CI,0.63 至 0.74)。在 48 小时时,两种抗真菌药物的中心间 EA 范围为 94.4%至 99.0%。对于 CLSI 方法和 Etest 的比较,24 小时和 48 小时的组间 ICC 分别为 0.69(95% CI,0.63 至 0.74)和 0.62(95% CI,0.55 至 0.68)。根据中心的不同,CAS 的 EA 范围为 76.5%至 98.5%,AMB 的 EA 范围为 90.3%至 97.4%。CAS 的 CA 范围为 87.9%至 91.4%,2 株菌 (1 株白色念珠菌和 1 株克鲁斯念珠菌) 出现 4 个非常大的错误,AMB 的 CA 范围为 97.5%至 99.5%,出现 4 个大错误。总之,Etest 显示出良好的实验室间重现性和与 CLSI 技术的良好相关性。它非常适合常规临床实验室,因此可用于监测该环境中临床酵母分离株的体外药敏性。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

3
E-test Determination of Antifungal Susceptibility of Species Isolated from Turkeys.火鸡分离株真菌药敏试验的E试验测定
J Vet Res. 2020 Nov 10;64(4):517-521. doi: 10.2478/jvetres-2020-0072. eCollection 2020 Dec.
5
A rapid method for post-antibiotic bacterial susceptibility testing.一种快速的抗生素后药敏试验方法。
PLoS One. 2019 Jan 10;14(1):e0210534. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0210534. eCollection 2019.

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验