Uete T, Matsuo K
Department of Clinical Investigation, Kitano Hospital, Tazuke Kofukai, Medical Institute.
Jpn J Antibiot. 1989 Sep;42(9):1900-12.
The reliability of the cephalothin (CET) disc susceptibility test in estimating approximate values of MICs was studied using various clinical isolates totaling 248 strains and using Showa discs (8 mm diameter containing 30 micrograms of CET) and Difco discs (6 mm diameter containing 30 micrograms of CET). Clinical significance of a 4 category system for the interpretation of the CET disc tests, which is widely used in Japan, was reevaluated to determine whether this system would be suitable or not for the evaluation of proper dose levels of administration. The results obtained with the disc methods were compared with MICs determined using the agar dilution method at an inoculum level of 10(6) CFU/ml. The results of the CET disc susceptibility test were well correlated with MICs, showing the reliability of the disc method to estimate approximate values of MICs. Break points in MIC values proposed for the classification of bacteria into 4 categories of susceptibility are ( ) MIC less than or equal to 3 micrograms/ml, (++) MIC greater than 3-15 micrograms/ml, (+) MIC greater than 15-60 micrograms/ml, (-) MIC greater than 60 micrograms/ml. With the Showa disc susceptibility test, 15 out of the 248 strains (6.0%) tested showed false positive results and 6 strains (2.4%) showed false negative results. With the Difco disc test, 18 out of the 248 strains (7.3%) tested showed false positive results and 6 (2.4%) showed false negative results. Excluding Enterococcus faecalis from the test, results because better in the quantitative estimation of MICs, resulting false positive rates of 3.2% (Showa), and 4.4% (Difco). A 3 category system of the interpretation of disc test is generally used in the USA and Europe. MIC break points proposed for the classification of the CET test are sensitive, MIC less than or equal to 8 micrograms/ml, and resistance, MIC greater than or equal to 32 micrograms/ml. With the Showa disc susceptibility test, 14 out of the 248 strains (5.6%) tested showed false positive results and 6 strains (2.4%) showed false negative results. With the Difco disc test 7 out of the 248 strains (2.8%) showed false positive results and 21 strains (8.5%) showed false negative results. In this study, MIC70S of CET against Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis were 1.56 and 0.78 micrograms/ml, respectively. CET was not so effective against Gram-negative rods except Klebsiella pneumoniae, Proteus mirabilis and Escherichia coli. MIC70S against K. pneumoniae, P. mirabilis, and E. coli were 6.25, 3.13, and 3.13 micrograms/ml, respectively.
使用总共248株各种临床分离菌株,采用昭和药敏纸片(直径8 mm,含30微克头孢噻吩)和迪夫科药敏纸片(直径6 mm,含30微克头孢噻吩),研究了头孢噻吩(CET)纸片药敏试验在估计最低抑菌浓度(MIC)近似值方面的可靠性。对日本广泛使用的用于解释CET纸片试验的四级分类系统的临床意义进行了重新评估,以确定该系统是否适合评估适当的给药剂量水平。将纸片法获得的结果与在接种量为10(6) CFU/ml时使用琼脂稀释法测定的MIC进行比较。CET纸片药敏试验的结果与MIC高度相关,表明纸片法在估计MIC近似值方面具有可靠性。为将细菌分为四类药敏性而提出的MIC值断点为:( )MIC小于或等于3微克/毫升,(++)MIC大于3至15微克/毫升,(+)MIC大于15至60微克/毫升,(-)MIC大于60微克/毫升。在昭和纸片药敏试验中,248株受试菌株中有15株(6.0%)出现假阳性结果,6株(2.4%)出现假阴性结果。在迪夫科纸片试验中,248株受试菌株中有18株(7.3%)出现假阳性结果。6株(2.4%)出现假阴性结果。从试验中排除粪肠球菌后,MIC的定量估计结果更好,昭和纸片法的假阳性率为3.2%,迪夫科纸片法为4.4%。在美国和欧洲,通常使用三级分类系统来解释纸片试验。为CET试验分类提出的MIC断点为敏感,MIC小于或等于8微克/毫升,耐药,MIC大于或等于32微克/毫升。在昭和纸片药敏试验中,248株受试菌株中有14株(5.6%)出现假阳性结果,6株(2.4%)出现假阴性结果。在迪夫科纸片试验中,248株受试菌株中有7株(2.8%)出现假阳性结果,21株(8.5%)出现假阴性结果。在本研究中,CET对金黄色葡萄球菌和表皮葡萄球菌的MIC70S分别为1.56和0.78微克/毫升。除肺炎克雷伯菌、奇异变形杆菌和大肠埃希菌外,CET对革兰氏阴性杆菌的效果不太理想。CET对肺炎克雷伯菌、奇异变形杆菌和大肠埃希菌的MIC70S分别为6.25、3.13和3.13微克/毫升。