Suppr超能文献

三种不同商业方法在检测. 中磷霉素敏感性的比较。

Comparison of Three Different Commercial Methods for Fosfomycin Susceptibility Testing in .

机构信息

Microbiology and Virology Unit, Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, University of Turin, Torino, Italy.

出版信息

Microb Drug Resist. 2022 Sep;28(9):911-915. doi: 10.1089/mdr.2021.0410. Epub 2022 Aug 11.

Abstract

The lack of internationally approved breakpoint and a handy susceptibility testing reduces fosfomycin usefulness against . Previous works defined low or moderate agreement between commercial methods and the reference method (agar dilution [AD]). In particular, data lack about testing against . We compared disk diffusion (DD), E-test (ET), and automated broth microdilution (BMD) to AD by testing 150 isolates. We obtained better categorical agreement (CA) for DD and ET for minimal inhibitory concentration >128 mg/L (84.7% and 92.7%, respectively), but with high very major error (VME). BMD had the lowest VME rate (2/42), but with 64% CA and 52/108 major errors. We cannot define a method comparable to AD. Larger studies, as well as the definition of a breakpoint value are needed for fosfomycin against

摘要

缺乏国际认可的折点和简便的药敏试验方法降低了磷霉素的临床应用价值。既往研究发现,商品化方法与参考方法(琼脂稀释法)之间的一致性较低或中等。特别是针对的药敏试验数据非常缺乏。我们通过检测 150 株临床分离株,比较了纸片扩散法(DD)、E 试验(ET)和自动化肉汤微量稀释法(BMD)与琼脂稀释法的检测结果。对于最低抑菌浓度(MIC)>128mg/L 的菌株,DD 和 ET 的分类符合率(CA)较好(分别为 84.7%和 92.7%),但严重错误率(VME)较高。BMD 的 VME 率最低(2/42),但 CA 为 64%,主要错误率为 52/108。我们无法定义一种与琼脂稀释法相媲美的方法。需要进一步开展更大规模的研究,以确定磷霉素针对的折点值。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验