在对常见呼吸道病原体进行测试时,评估 20 µg 左旋肉碱片剂与肉汤微量稀释法的效果。

IF 4.9 2区 医学 Q1 INFECTIOUS DISEASES International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents Pub Date : 2024-10-25 DOI:10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2024.107366
Ying Cao , Jichao Zhu , Bingshao Liang , Yan Guo , Li Ding , Fupin Hu
{"title":"在对常见呼吸道病原体进行测试时,评估 20 µg 左旋肉碱片剂与肉汤微量稀释法的效果。","authors":"Ying Cao ,&nbsp;Jichao Zhu ,&nbsp;Bingshao Liang ,&nbsp;Yan Guo ,&nbsp;Li Ding ,&nbsp;Fupin Hu","doi":"10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2024.107366","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To evaluate the performance of the disk diffusion test with lefamulin 20 µg compared with the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) reference broth microdilution (BMD) method.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A total of 572 clinical stains, including 240 <em>Staphylococcus aureus</em>, 211 <em>Streptococcus pneumoniae</em>, and 121 <em>Haemophilus influenzae</em>, isolated from 71 medical centres from the China Antimicrobial Surveillance Network in 2020. BMD method and disk diffusion methods were performed according to CLSI. Categorical agreement (CA), major error (ME), and very ME (VME) were calculated.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Lefamulin showed potent activity against <em>S. aureus, S. pneumoniae,</em> and <em>H. influenzae</em>. Using the BMD method, lefamulin inhibited 97.1% of <em>S. aureus</em> isolates at 0.25 mg/L; seven isolates were not susceptible. For <em>S. pneumoniae</em> and <em>H. influenzae,</em> the percentage of susceptibility to lefamulin was 100% and no non-susceptible strains were found in this study. Compared with the reference BMD method, the CA of the lefamulin 20 µg disk testing was 99.8% (571/572), with 14.3% (1/7) VME and no ME. In our study, VME was determined in <em>S. aureus</em>. For <em>S. pneumoniae</em> and <em>H. influenzae</em>, the VME was not determined due to the lack of lefamulin non-susceptible strains.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The lefamulin 20 µg disk diffusion testing showed excellent CA and ME with the reference BMD method for <em>S. aureus, S. pneumoniae,</em> and <em>H. influenzae</em>. The VME exceeding CLSI recommendations may be a bias due to fewer lefamulin non-susceptible isolates. Our results suggest that lefamulin non-susceptible isolates detected by disk diffusion should be confirmed by the reference BMD.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":13818,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents","volume":"64 6","pages":"Article 107366"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment of lefamulin 20 µg disk versus broth microdilution when tested against common respiratory pathogens\",\"authors\":\"Ying Cao ,&nbsp;Jichao Zhu ,&nbsp;Bingshao Liang ,&nbsp;Yan Guo ,&nbsp;Li Ding ,&nbsp;Fupin Hu\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2024.107366\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To evaluate the performance of the disk diffusion test with lefamulin 20 µg compared with the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) reference broth microdilution (BMD) method.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A total of 572 clinical stains, including 240 <em>Staphylococcus aureus</em>, 211 <em>Streptococcus pneumoniae</em>, and 121 <em>Haemophilus influenzae</em>, isolated from 71 medical centres from the China Antimicrobial Surveillance Network in 2020. BMD method and disk diffusion methods were performed according to CLSI. Categorical agreement (CA), major error (ME), and very ME (VME) were calculated.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Lefamulin showed potent activity against <em>S. aureus, S. pneumoniae,</em> and <em>H. influenzae</em>. Using the BMD method, lefamulin inhibited 97.1% of <em>S. aureus</em> isolates at 0.25 mg/L; seven isolates were not susceptible. For <em>S. pneumoniae</em> and <em>H. influenzae,</em> the percentage of susceptibility to lefamulin was 100% and no non-susceptible strains were found in this study. Compared with the reference BMD method, the CA of the lefamulin 20 µg disk testing was 99.8% (571/572), with 14.3% (1/7) VME and no ME. In our study, VME was determined in <em>S. aureus</em>. For <em>S. pneumoniae</em> and <em>H. influenzae</em>, the VME was not determined due to the lack of lefamulin non-susceptible strains.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The lefamulin 20 µg disk diffusion testing showed excellent CA and ME with the reference BMD method for <em>S. aureus, S. pneumoniae,</em> and <em>H. influenzae</em>. The VME exceeding CLSI recommendations may be a bias due to fewer lefamulin non-susceptible isolates. Our results suggest that lefamulin non-susceptible isolates detected by disk diffusion should be confirmed by the reference BMD.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13818,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents\",\"volume\":\"64 6\",\"pages\":\"Article 107366\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924857924002826\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924857924002826","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的方法:从2020年中国抗菌药物监测网(CHINET)的71个医疗中心分离的572个临床污点,包括240个金黄色葡萄球菌、211个肺炎链球菌和121个流感嗜血杆菌。根据 CLSI 标准,采用肉汤微量稀释法和磁盘扩散法进行检测。计算了分类一致性(CA)、主要误差(ME)和极主要误差(VME):结果:来法菌素对金黄色葡萄球菌、肺炎双球菌和流感嗜血杆菌具有强效活性。采用肉汤微稀释法,在 0.25 mg/L 的浓度下,乐福霉素可抑制 97.1%的金黄色葡萄球菌分离株;有 7 个分离株对乐福霉素不敏感。对于肺炎双球菌和流感嗜血杆菌,本研究发现它们对来氟霉素的敏感率为 100%,没有发现不敏感的菌株。与参考肉汤微量稀释法相比,乐福霉素 20 µg 磁盘测试的 CA 为 99.8%(571/572),VME 为 14.3%(1/7),无 ME。在我们的研究中,金黄色葡萄球菌被确定为 VME。对于肺炎双球菌和流感嗜血杆菌,由于缺乏对左旋氨霉素不敏感的菌株,因此未确定VME:结论:用参考肉汤微量稀释法对金黄色葡萄球菌、肺炎双球菌和流感嗜血杆菌进行的 20 µg 左旋氨氯地平盘扩散试验显示了极佳的 CA 和 ME 值。VME超过CLSI推荐值可能是由于对来氟霉素不敏感的分离物较少而造成的偏差。我们的结果表明,用盘扩散法检测到的对来福米林不敏感的分离株应通过参考 BMD 进行确认。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Assessment of lefamulin 20 µg disk versus broth microdilution when tested against common respiratory pathogens

Objective

To evaluate the performance of the disk diffusion test with lefamulin 20 µg compared with the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) reference broth microdilution (BMD) method.

Methods

A total of 572 clinical stains, including 240 Staphylococcus aureus, 211 Streptococcus pneumoniae, and 121 Haemophilus influenzae, isolated from 71 medical centres from the China Antimicrobial Surveillance Network in 2020. BMD method and disk diffusion methods were performed according to CLSI. Categorical agreement (CA), major error (ME), and very ME (VME) were calculated.

Results

Lefamulin showed potent activity against S. aureus, S. pneumoniae, and H. influenzae. Using the BMD method, lefamulin inhibited 97.1% of S. aureus isolates at 0.25 mg/L; seven isolates were not susceptible. For S. pneumoniae and H. influenzae, the percentage of susceptibility to lefamulin was 100% and no non-susceptible strains were found in this study. Compared with the reference BMD method, the CA of the lefamulin 20 µg disk testing was 99.8% (571/572), with 14.3% (1/7) VME and no ME. In our study, VME was determined in S. aureus. For S. pneumoniae and H. influenzae, the VME was not determined due to the lack of lefamulin non-susceptible strains.

Conclusions

The lefamulin 20 µg disk diffusion testing showed excellent CA and ME with the reference BMD method for S. aureus, S. pneumoniae, and H. influenzae. The VME exceeding CLSI recommendations may be a bias due to fewer lefamulin non-susceptible isolates. Our results suggest that lefamulin non-susceptible isolates detected by disk diffusion should be confirmed by the reference BMD.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
21.60
自引率
0.90%
发文量
176
审稿时长
36 days
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents is a peer-reviewed publication offering comprehensive and current reference information on the physical, pharmacological, in vitro, and clinical properties of individual antimicrobial agents, covering antiviral, antiparasitic, antibacterial, and antifungal agents. The journal not only communicates new trends and developments through authoritative review articles but also addresses the critical issue of antimicrobial resistance, both in hospital and community settings. Published content includes solicited reviews by leading experts and high-quality original research papers in the specified fields.
期刊最新文献
Toxicokinetic profiling of VRP-034: Evaluating its potential in mitigating polymyxin-B-associated nephrotoxicity. Clarithromycin for improved clinical outcomes in community-acquired pneumonia: A subgroup analysis of the ACCESS trial. Analysis of time-to-positivity data in tuberculosis treatment studies: Identifying a new limit of quantification. In vitro antimicrobial activity of six novel β-lactam and β-lactamase inhibitor combinations and cefiderocol against NDM-producing Enterobacterales in China. Individualized antimicrobial therapy using antibiotic combination testing and therapeutic drug monitoring to treat carbapenem-resistant Acintobacter baumannii infection.
×
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