Cormican M G, Erwin M S, Jones R N
Department of Pathology, University of Iowa College of Medicine, Iowa City 52242, USA.
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 1996 Mar;24(3):169-72. doi: 10.1016/0732-8893(96)00019-3.
The accuracy of disk diffusion susceptibility testing of lomefloxacin was evaluated using 1,555 recent clinical isolates from ten medical centers. The isolates were rapidly growing nonfastidious aerobic species (1,501 isolates) and Haemophilus species (54 isolates), each found as an indicated species in the product package insert. Applying the recently proposed modification of disk diffusion interpretive criteria (susceptible at > or = 20 mm and resistant at < or = 16 mm), absolute categorical agreement for nonfastidious aerobes (1,501 strains) was 95.5% with 0.5% very major and 0.1% major errors (error rates calculated using all tested strains as the denominator). The intermethod discord (MIC vs disk diffusion) was 0.5%. This contrasts to the current NCCLS recommended criteria (susceptible at > or = 22 mm and resistant at < or = 18 mm) where the absolute categorical agreement was significantly less (89.6%) with 0.2% very major, and 0.3% major errors, and the intermethod discord was 7.1%. For Haemophilus species (54 strains), intermethod agreement was complete using either the current NCCLS interpretive criteria or the modified criteria. These multicenter (ten laboratories) data support the acceptance of the proposed modification of disk diffusion interpretive criteria for 10-microgram lomefloxacin disks.
使用来自十个医疗中心的1555株近期临床分离株评估了洛美沙星纸片扩散法药敏试验的准确性。这些分离株包括快速生长的非苛养需氧菌(1501株)和嗜血杆菌属(54株),每种均为产品包装说明书中指明的菌种。应用最近提出的纸片扩散法判读标准修改版(抑菌圈直径≥20mm为敏感,≤16mm为耐药),非苛养需氧菌(1501株)的绝对分类一致性为95.5%,极重大错误率为0.5%,重大错误率为0.1%(错误率以所有测试菌株为分母计算)。方法间不一致率(MIC与纸片扩散法对比)为0.5%。这与当前美国国家临床实验室标准委员会(NCCLS)推荐的标准(抑菌圈直径≥22mm为敏感,≤18mm为耐药)形成对比,后者的绝对分类一致性显著较低(89.6%),极重大错误率为0.2%,重大错误率为0.3%,方法间不一致率为7.1%。对于嗜血杆菌属(54株),使用当前NCCLS判读标准或修改后的标准,方法间一致性均为完全一致。这些多中心(十个实验室)数据支持接受针对10微克洛美沙星纸片的纸片扩散法判读标准修改版。