Sung Ju Kim, Young Uh, In Ho Jang, Kwan Soo Lee, Soon Deok Park, Kap Jun Yoon
{"title":"用于检测β-溶血性链球菌和翠绿菌群链球菌的MicroScan MICroSTREP加抗菌面板的评价。","authors":"Sung Ju Kim, Young Uh, In Ho Jang, Kwan Soo Lee, Soon Deok Park, Kap Jun Yoon","doi":"10.3343/kjlm.2011.31.3.185","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In order to determine the clinical usefulness of the MicroScan (Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics, USA) MICroSTREP plus antimicrobial panel (MICroSTREP) for testing antimicrobial susceptibility of β-hemolytic streptococci (BHS) and viridans group streptococci (VGS), we compared the accuracy of MICroSTREP with that of the CLSI reference method.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":17890,"journal":{"name":"Korean Journal of Laboratory Medicine","volume":"31 3","pages":"185-90"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3343/kjlm.2011.31.3.185","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of the MicroScan MICroSTREP plus antimicrobial panel for testing β-hemolytic streptococci and viridans group streptococci.\",\"authors\":\"Sung Ju Kim, Young Uh, In Ho Jang, Kwan Soo Lee, Soon Deok Park, Kap Jun Yoon\",\"doi\":\"10.3343/kjlm.2011.31.3.185\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In order to determine the clinical usefulness of the MicroScan (Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics, USA) MICroSTREP plus antimicrobial panel (MICroSTREP) for testing antimicrobial susceptibility of β-hemolytic streptococci (BHS) and viridans group streptococci (VGS), we compared the accuracy of MICroSTREP with that of the CLSI reference method.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17890,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Korean Journal of Laboratory Medicine\",\"volume\":\"31 3\",\"pages\":\"185-90\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3343/kjlm.2011.31.3.185\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Korean Journal of Laboratory Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3343/kjlm.2011.31.3.185\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2011/6/28 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean Journal of Laboratory Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3343/kjlm.2011.31.3.185","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2011/6/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
摘要
背景:为了确定MicroScan (Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics, USA) MICroSTREP加抗菌面板(MICroSTREP)检测β-溶血性链球菌(BHS)和翠绿菌群链球菌(VGS)抗菌敏感性的临床应用价值,我们比较了MICroSTREP与CLSI参考方法的准确性。方法:采用MICroSTREP和CLSI琼脂稀释法检测75株BHS和59株VGS菌株对氨苄西林、青霉素、头孢噻肟、美罗培南、红霉素、克林霉素、左氧氟沙星、万古霉素的敏感性。结果:MICroSTREP与CLSI参比法在±1倍稀释范围内的最低抑菌浓度(mic)基本一致性为98.2%,分类一致性为96.9%。对于BHS分离株,红霉素的CA为96.0%,而头孢噻肟、美罗培南、左氧氟沙星和万古霉素的CA为96.0%(氨苄西林、青霉素和克林霉素;98.7%)为100%。VGS分离株对青霉素的CA为84.7%,对红霉素、克林霉素和万古霉素的CA为86.5%;氨苄西林为88.1%;对头孢噻肟和左氧氟沙星,96.6%)为100%。所有VGS分离株中青霉素和氨苄西林的分类错误均较小。结论:MICroSTREP的准确性与CLSI参考方法相当,提示该面板可用于BHS和VGS的药敏检测。
Evaluation of the MicroScan MICroSTREP plus antimicrobial panel for testing β-hemolytic streptococci and viridans group streptococci.
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 β-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.