Evaluation of the MicroScan MICroSTREP Plus Antimicrobial Panel for Testing ß-Hemolytic Streptococci and Viridans Group Streptococci
2
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Background: In order to determine the clinical usefulness of the MicroScan (Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics, USA) MICroSTREP plus antimicrobial panel (MICroSTREP) for testing antimicrobial susceptibility of ß-hemolytic streptococci (BHS) and viridans group streptococci (VGS), we compared the accuracy of MICroSTREP with that of the CLSI reference method. Methods: Seventy-five BHS and 59 VGS isolates were tested for antimicrobial susceptibility to ampicillin, penicillin, cefotaxime, meropenem, erythromycin, clindamycin, levofloxacin, and vancomycin by using MICroSTREP and the CLSI agar dilution method. Results: The overall essential agreement with regard to minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) (within ±1 double dilution) between MICroSTREP and the CLSI reference method was 98.2%, and categorical agreement (CA) was 96.9%. For the BHS isolates, the CA for erythromycin was 96.0%, whereas that for cefotaxime, meropenem, levofloxacin, and vancomycin (for ampicillin, penicillin, and clindamycin; 98.7%) was 100%. For the VGS isolates, the CA for penicillin was 84.7% and that for erythromycin, clindamycin, and vancomycin (for meropenem, 86.5%; for ampicillin, 88.1%; and for cefotaxime and levofloxacin, 96.6%) was 100%. All categorical errors of penicillin and ampicillin in the VGS isolates were minor. Conclusions: The accuracy of MICroSTREP is comparable to that of the CLSI reference method, suggesting that this panel can be effective for testing antimicrobial susceptibility of BHS and VGS.
Abstract
Background: In order to determine the clinical usefulness of the MicroScan (Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics, USA) MICroSTREP plus antimicrobial panel (MICroSTREP) for testing antimicrobial susceptibility of ß-hemolytic streptococci (BHS) and viridans group streptococci (VGS), we compared the accuracy of MICroSTREP with that of the CLSI reference method. Methods: Seventy-five BHS and 59 VGS isolates were tested for antimicrobial susceptibility to ampicillin, penicillin, cefotaxime, meropenem, erythromycin, clindamycin, levofloxacin, and vancomycin by using MICroSTREP and the CLSI agar dilution method. Results: The overall essential agreement with regard to minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) (within ±1 double dilution) between MICroSTREP and the CLSI reference method was 98.2%, and categorical agreement (CA) was 96.9%. For the BHS isolates, the CA for erythromycin was 96.0%, whereas that for cefotaxime, meropenem, levofloxacin, and vancomycin (for ampicillin, penicillin, and clindamycin; 98.7%) was 100%. For the VGS isolates, the CA for penicillin was 84.7% and that for erythromycin, clindamycin, and vancomycin (for meropenem, 86.5%; for ampicillin, 88.1%; and for cefotaxime and levofloxacin, 96.6%) was 100%. All categorical errors of penicillin and ampicillin in the VGS isolates were minor. Conclusions: The accuracy of MICroSTREP is comparable to that of the CLSI reference method, suggesting that this panel can be effective for testing antimicrobial susceptibility of BHS and VGS.
참고문헌 (15)
- Young Uh, "Antimicrobial Susceptibility Patterns and Macrolide Resistance Genesof beta-Hemolytic Viridans Group Streptococci in a Tertiary KoreanHospital", Journal of Korean Medical Science, 22(5), pp.791~794 (2007), 대한의학회
- Gillespie SH, "Failure of penicillin in Streptococcus pyogenes phary-ngeal infection", Lancet, 352, pp.1954~1956 (1998)
- Schuchat A, "Group B streptococcal disease: from trials and tribulations to triumph and trepidation", Clin Infect Dis, 33, pp.751~756 (2001)
- Bisno AL, "Practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of group A streptococcal pharyngitis", Clin Infect Dis, 35, pp.113~125 (2002)
- Gordon KA, "Antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of β-hemolytic and viridans group streptococci: report from the SENTRY Antimicrobial surveillance program (1997-2000)", Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis, 43, pp.157~162 (2002)
- Jones RN, "Update on the cefdinir spectrum and potency against pathogens isolated from uncomplicated skin and soft tissue infections in North America: are we evaluating the orally administered cephalosporins correctly", Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis, 55, pp.351~356 (2006)
- Hindler JF, "Susceptibility test methods: fastidious bacteria In Manual of clinical microbiology. 9th ed.", pp.1193~1213 (2007), American Society for Microbiology Press
- Doern GV, "Emergence of high rates of antimicrobial resistance among viridans group streptococci in the United States", Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 40, pp.891~894 (1996)
- Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, "Performance standar-ds for antimicrobial susceptibility testing; Twentieth informational supplement, M100-S20" (2010), Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute
- Barenfanger J, "Improved antimicrobial interventions have benefits", J Clin Microbiol, 39, pp.2823~2828 (2001)
- Kerremans JJ, "Rapid identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing reduce antibiotic use and accelerate pathogen-directed antibiotic use", J Antimicrob Chemother, 61, pp.428~435 (2008)
- Guthrie LL, "Comparison of MicroScan MICroSTREP, PASCO, and Sensititre MIC panels for determining antimicrobial susceptibilities of Streptococcus pneumon-iae", Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis, 33, pp.267~273 (1999)
- Mittman SA, "Comparison of BD phoenix to Vitek 2, MicroScan MICroSTREP, and Etest for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Streptococcus pneumoniae", J Clin Microbiol, 47, pp.3557~3561 (2009)
- Jorgensen JH, "Evaluation of the Dade MicroScan MICroSTREP antimicrobial susceptibility testing panel with selected Streptococcus pneumoniae challenge strains and recent clinical isolates", J Clin Microbiol, 36, pp.788~791 (1998)
- Food and Drug Administration, "Class II special controls guidance document: antimicrobial susceptibility test (AST) systems; guidance for industry and FDA" (2007), Food and Drug Administration