Wanger A, Mills K, Nelson P W, Rex J H
Department of Pathology, University of Texas Medical School, Houston, USA.
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1995 Nov;39(11):2520-2. doi: 10.1128/AAC.39.11.2520.
The National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS) proposed macrobroth reference method (M27P) for susceptibility testing of yeasts is technically difficult. We evaluated Etest, a simple agar-based MIC methodology, as a possible alternative. In studies of six yeast quality control strains, Etest yielded results identical to those obtained by the NCCLS reference method for both amphotericin B and fluconazole. In studies of 91 clinical Candida isolates, agreement +/- 2 dilutions between the two methods was 95% for fluconazole with phosphate-buffered RPMI 1640 agar and 96 to 97% for amphotericin B with either MOPS (morpholinepropanesulfonic acid)-buffered RPMI 1640 agar or antibiotic medium 3 agar. While the two methods had excellent general agreement, testing of a collection of amphotericin B-resistant isolates demonstrated that, unlike the NCCLS reference method, Etest readily identified the resistant isolates and could do so with a defined medium. Etest is equivalent to the NCCLS proposed method for susceptibility testing of yeasts and superior in its ability to detect amphotericin B resistance.
美国国家临床实验室标准委员会(NCCLS)提出的用于酵母菌药敏试验的常量肉汤参考方法(M27P)在技术上难度较大。我们评估了Etest(一种基于琼脂的简单最小抑菌浓度测定方法)作为一种可能的替代方法。在对6株酵母菌质量控制菌株的研究中,对于两性霉素B和氟康唑,Etest得出的结果与NCCLS参考方法所获得的结果相同。在对91株临床念珠菌分离株的研究中,对于氟康唑,在磷酸盐缓冲的RPMI 1640琼脂培养基上,两种方法结果相差±2个稀释度的符合率为95%;对于两性霉素B,在MOPS(吗啉丙磺酸)缓冲的RPMI 1640琼脂培养基或抗生素培养基3琼脂上,两种方法结果相差±2个稀释度的符合率为96%至97%。虽然两种方法总体一致性良好,但对一组两性霉素B耐药分离株的检测表明,与NCCLS参考方法不同,Etest能够很容易地鉴定出耐药分离株,并且可以在特定培养基上做到这一点。Etest与NCCLS提出的酵母菌药敏试验方法相当,且在检测两性霉素B耐药性方面更具优势。