Suppr超能文献

Etest 法和肉汤微量稀释法检测耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌万古霉素最小抑菌浓度与群体分析谱的相关性:Etest 法不存在 MIC 高估。

Correlation of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus vancomycin minimal inhibitory concentration results by Etest and broth microdilution methods with population analysis profile: lack of Etest overestimation of the MIC.

机构信息

Department of Internal Medicine, St John Hospital and Medical Center, 19251 Mack Avenue; suite 340, Medical Education, Grosse Pointe Woods, MI 48236, USA.

出版信息

Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2013 Jun;32(6):803-6. doi: 10.1007/s10096-012-1811-7. Epub 2013 Jan 10.

Abstract

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentrations (V-MICs) are sometimes reported to be higher according to Etest versus broth microdilution (BMD). These observations are often interpreted as an Etest overestimation of the actual MIC. We measured V-MIC of 484 MRSA blood isolates using Etest, BMD, and a modified BMD (M-BMD) with incremental dilutions parallel to the Etest scale, correlated the results with population analysis profile-area under the curve (PAP-AUC). All MIC tests were done in parallel. The mean V-MIC was comparable (1.83 ± 0.44 [Etest], 1.88 ± 0.67 [BMD] and 1.75 ± 0.57 mg/L [M-BMD]; p = 0.9 [ANOVA]). The V-MICs/PAP-AUC correlation coefficient was 0.555 (Etest), 0.513 (BMD), and 0.586 (M-BMD). Etest MICs were equal (44.2 %), one dilution higher (21.9 %), two dilutions higher (2.5 %), one dilution lower (29.8 %), and two dilutions lower (1.6 %) than BMD MICs and were equal (61.5 %), one dilution higher (28.3 %), two dilutions higher (0.4 %), one dilution lower (9.5 %), and two dilutions lower (0.2 %) than M-BMD MICs. The mean PAP-AUC for Etest vs M-BMD among isolates with similar Etest/M-BMD MIC values was 0.25 ± 0.15 vs 0.35 ± 0.13 (p = 0.8), 0.46 ± 0.16 vs 0.50 ± 0.17 (p = 0.8), 0.64 ± 0.19 vs 0.67 ± 0.21 (p = 0.9), and 0.90 ± 0.31 vs 0.88 ± 0.25 (p = 1.0) for isolates with V-MIC of ≤ 1, 1.5, 2, and ≥ 3 mg/L respectively. These results suggest that Etest might not overestimate V-MIC in comparison to M-BMD or BMD; Etest and M-BMD tests depict comparable PAP-AUC and have a higher correlation with PAP-AUC than the conventional BMD, probably because of the more detailed results. Etest may be more suitable than conventional BMD for MIC outcome assessment because of the more detailed MICs.

摘要

耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌(MRSA)的万古霉素最低抑菌浓度(V-MIC)根据 Etest 与肉汤微量稀释法(BMD)的结果,有时会报告更高。这些观察结果通常被解释为 Etest 对实际 MIC 的高估。我们使用 Etest、BMD 和带有与 Etest 刻度平行的增量稀释的改良 BMD(M-BMD)测量了 484 株 MRSA 血培养分离株的 V-MIC,将结果与群体分析曲线下面积(PAP-AUC)相关联。所有 MIC 测试均同时进行。平均 V-MIC 相当(Etest:1.83 ± 0.44,BMD:1.88 ± 0.67,M-BMD:1.75 ± 0.57mg/L;p = 0.9[ANOVA])。Etest MIC 与 PAP-AUC 的相关系数为 0.555(Etest)、0.513(BMD)和 0.586(M-BMD)。Etest MIC 与 BMD MIC 相等(44.2%)、高一个稀释度(21.9%)、高两个稀释度(2.5%)、低一个稀释度(29.8%)和低两个稀释度(1.6%),与 M-BMD MIC 相等(61.5%)、高一个稀释度(28.3%)、高两个稀释度(0.4%)、低一个稀释度(9.5%)和低两个稀释度(0.2%)。在 MIC 值相似的分离株中,Etest 与 M-BMD 的平均 PAP-AUC 为 0.25 ± 0.15 与 0.35 ± 0.13(p = 0.8)、0.46 ± 0.16 与 0.50 ± 0.17(p = 0.8)、0.64 ± 0.19 与 0.67 ± 0.21(p = 0.9)和 0.90 ± 0.31 与 0.88 ± 0.25(p = 1.0),V-MIC 分别为 ≤1、1.5、2 和 ≥3mg/L。这些结果表明,与 M-BMD 或 BMD 相比,Etest 可能不会高估 V-MIC;Etest 和 M-BMD 测试描绘了相似的 PAP-AUC,与常规 BMD 相比,与 PAP-AUC 的相关性更高,这可能是因为结果更详细。由于 MIC 更详细,Etest 可能比常规 BMD 更适合 MIC 结果评估。

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