Suppr超能文献

三种革兰氏阴性杆菌抗菌药敏试验自动化系统的比较

Comparison of three automated systems for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of gram-negative bacilli.

作者信息

Kelly M T, Latimer J M, Balfour L C

出版信息

J Clin Microbiol. 1982 May;15(5):902-5. doi: 10.1128/jcm.15.5.902-905.1982.

Abstract

Several instruments for automated or semiautomated susceptibility testing are currently available. Three of these instruments, Autobac (General Diagnostics, Warner-Lambert Co., Morris Plains, N.J.), MS-2 (Abbott Laboratories, Dallas, Tex.), and AutoMicrobic system (AMS) (Vitek, Inc., Hazelwood, Mo.) were compared for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of gram-negative bacilli. A total of 207 isolates representing 29 species of gram-negative bacilli were tested simultaneously by each instrument and by a standardized disk diffusion reference method. Nine antimicrobial agents, including ampicillin, carbenicillin, cephalothin, gentamicin, tobramycin, amikacin, tetracycline, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, and nitrofurantoin were tested. Discrepancies between the results of the automated and reference disk diffusion methods were resolved by agar dilution testing. Overall, 93% of the Autobac and MS-2 results and 83% of the AMS results were in agreement with the results obtained by the reference methods. The results of the Autobac, MS-2, and AMS systems respectively included 3.3, 2.3, and 4.2% major and very major discrepancies. Excessive testing discrepancies were found for certain drugs, including ampicillin, tetracycline, and nitrofurantoin, and for certain organisms, including species of Providencia, Serratia, and Citrobacter. The results of this comparison of three automated systems for antimicrobial susceptibility testing indicate that the Autobac and MS-2 instruments provided highly reliable results. The AMS need further development of its susceptibility testing capability to eliminate an unacceptably high number of minor discrepancies.

摘要

目前有几种用于自动或半自动药敏试验的仪器。对其中三种仪器,即自动细菌鉴定仪(通用诊断公司,华纳-兰伯特公司,新泽西州莫里斯平)、MS-2(雅培实验室,得克萨斯州达拉斯)和自动微生物系统(AMS)(维泰克公司,密苏里州黑兹尔伍德)进行了革兰氏阴性杆菌药敏试验的比较。每种仪器和标准化纸片扩散参考方法同时对总共207株代表29种革兰氏阴性杆菌的分离株进行了检测。检测了九种抗菌药物,包括氨苄青霉素、羧苄青霉素、头孢噻吩、庆大霉素、妥布霉素、阿米卡星、四环素、甲氧苄啶-磺胺甲恶唑和呋喃妥因。通过琼脂稀释试验解决了自动方法和参考纸片扩散法结果之间的差异。总体而言,自动细菌鉴定仪和MS-2结果的93%以及AMS结果的83%与参考方法获得的结果一致。自动细菌鉴定仪、MS-2和AMS系统的结果分别包括3.3%、2.3%和4.2%的主要和非常主要差异。发现某些药物(包括氨苄青霉素、四环素和呋喃妥因)以及某些生物体(包括普罗威登斯菌属、沙雷菌属和柠檬酸杆菌属)存在过多的检测差异。这三种抗菌药敏试验自动系统的比较结果表明,自动细菌鉴定仪和MS-2仪器提供了高度可靠的结果。AMS需要进一步发展其药敏试验能力,以消除数量高得令人无法接受的微小差异。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

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