Comparison of broth microdilution and E-test for susceptibility of MRSA to vancomycin

Dr N.P. Senanayake, FS Hiflan, H. Abeygoonawardena, RA Karawgoda, NS Chandrasiri, A. Balasuriya
{"title":"Comparison of broth microdilution and E-test for susceptibility of MRSA to vancomycin","authors":"Dr N.P. Senanayake, FS Hiflan, H. Abeygoonawardena, RA Karawgoda, NS Chandrasiri, A. Balasuriya","doi":"10.4038/sljid.v14i1.8598","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Healthcare-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) developed soon after the introduction of methicillin. These bacteria have shown resistance to multiple drugs and therefore vancomycin became the antibiotic of choice for treatment of MRSA infections. Vancomycin is a bactericidal antibiotic that acts by inhibiting bacterial cell wall synthesis. This study aimed to compare broth microdilution (BMD) and E-test in determining vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) against MRSA.Methods: A total of 30 clinical isolates of MRSA were acquired from Colombo South Teaching Hospital, Sri Lanka. These MRSA strains were identified by cefoxitin disk diffusion and the vancomycin MIC was determined through BMD and E-test. The Kruskal-Wallis test was applied to test if the samples originated from the same distribution with post hoc determination of the correlation between methods using the Mann-Whitney U test.Results: All 30 MRSA isolates were 100% vancomycin susceptible (≤2 μg/mL) irrespective of methodology, according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) established breakpoints. However, the E-test MIC values were 1 to 2 dilutions higher than those of BMD. A statistically significant difference between vancomycin MICs of BMD and E-test (p = <0.00001) was calculated which indicated a difference in accuracy.Conclusion: Due to cost, convenience, and the ability to detect vancomycin intermediate Staphylococcus aureus (VISA), exploring the possibility of using E-test as an alternative to BMD is worthwhile.","PeriodicalId":32303,"journal":{"name":"Sri Lankan Journal of Infectious Diseases","volume":"141 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sri Lankan Journal of Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4038/sljid.v14i1.8598","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Healthcare-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) developed soon after the introduction of methicillin. These bacteria have shown resistance to multiple drugs and therefore vancomycin became the antibiotic of choice for treatment of MRSA infections. Vancomycin is a bactericidal antibiotic that acts by inhibiting bacterial cell wall synthesis. This study aimed to compare broth microdilution (BMD) and E-test in determining vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) against MRSA.Methods: A total of 30 clinical isolates of MRSA were acquired from Colombo South Teaching Hospital, Sri Lanka. These MRSA strains were identified by cefoxitin disk diffusion and the vancomycin MIC was determined through BMD and E-test. The Kruskal-Wallis test was applied to test if the samples originated from the same distribution with post hoc determination of the correlation between methods using the Mann-Whitney U test.Results: All 30 MRSA isolates were 100% vancomycin susceptible (≤2 μg/mL) irrespective of methodology, according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) established breakpoints. However, the E-test MIC values were 1 to 2 dilutions higher than those of BMD. A statistically significant difference between vancomycin MICs of BMD and E-test (p = <0.00001) was calculated which indicated a difference in accuracy.Conclusion: Due to cost, convenience, and the ability to detect vancomycin intermediate Staphylococcus aureus (VISA), exploring the possibility of using E-test as an alternative to BMD is worthwhile.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
肉汤微量稀释法和 E 测试法比较 MRSA 对万古霉素的敏感性
导言:与医疗保健相关的耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌(MRSA)是在甲氧西林问世后不久出现的。这些细菌对多种药物产生耐药性,因此万古霉素成为治疗 MRSA 感染的首选抗生素。万古霉素是一种杀菌抗生素,通过抑制细菌细胞壁的合成发挥作用。本研究旨在比较肉汤微量稀释法(BMD)和电子测试法在确定万古霉素对 MRSA 的最低抑菌浓度(MIC)方面的作用:方法:从斯里兰卡科伦坡南部教学医院共获得 30 株 MRSA 临床分离株。这些 MRSA 菌株通过头孢西丁盘扩散法进行鉴定,并通过 BMD 和 E 测试确定万古霉素 MIC。采用 Kruskal-Wallis 检验法检测样本是否来自同一分布区,并采用 Mann-Whitney U 检验法对不同方法之间的相关性进行事后测定:结果:根据临床与实验室标准协会(CLSI)确定的断点,无论采用哪种方法,所有30株MRSA分离株都对万古霉素100%敏感(≤2 μg/mL)。不过,E-测试的 MIC 值比 BMD 的 MIC 值高 1 到 2 个稀释倍数。经计算,BMD 和 E-test 的万古霉素 MIC 值差异有统计学意义(p = <0.00001),这表明两者的准确性存在差异:由于成本低、方便且能检测万古霉素中间型金黄色葡萄球菌 (VISA),因此值得探索使用 E-test 替代 BMD 的可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Serologic evidence of Zika virus, hepatitis B virus and rubella virus in pregnant women attending a south-west based Nigerian tertiary care centre An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay based study Antibiotic allergy: Mislabels, Misinterpretation and Mismanagement Clinical characteristics and analysis of treatment outcome at one year of rhino-orbito-cerebral mucormycosis cases during the second wave of the Covid-19 pandemic (2nd wave); experiences from a tertiary care hospital in Kolkata, India Detection of carbapenemase producing enterobacterales using the Modified Hodge Test from clinical isolates in Colombo South Teaching Hospital and Sri Jayewardenepura General Hospital, Sri Lanka in 2017 Comparison of broth microdilution and E-test for susceptibility of MRSA to vancomycin
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1