Direct susceptibility testing with positive BacT/Alert blood cultures by using MicroScan overnight and rapid panels

被引:44
作者
Waites, KB
Brookings, ES
Moser, SA
Zimmer, BL
机构
[1] Univ Alabama, Dept Pathol, Birmingham, AL 35233 USA
[2] Dade MicroScan Inc, W Sacramento, CA USA
关键词
D O I
10.1128/JCM.36.7.2052-2056.1998
中图分类号
Q93 [微生物学];
学科分类号
071005 ; 100705 ;
摘要
Studies were conducted on a method of direct inoculation of MicroScan dried overnight and of rapid panels with positive aerobic blood cultures obtained from the BacT/Alert to determine antimicrobial susceptibilities. Inocula were limited to specimens that appeared unimicrobic on Gram stain. Results were compared to those obtained from panels inoculated following subculture. For 133 gram-negative bacilli, there were 94.7 and 93.5% categorical agreements between direct and standard methods for all drugs tested with overnight and rapid panels, respectively. For 104 gram-positive cocci, there were 93.2 and 93.1% categorical agreements for overnight and rapid panels, respectively. The major error (false resistance) rate for gram negatives was 1.4% for overnight versus 0.7% for rapid panels, The very major error (false susceptibility) rate was 2.7% for overnight versus 8.1% for rapid panels. The total error rates were 1.6% for overnight panels and 1.5% for rapid panels. The major error rates for gram-positive direct susceptibility tests were 2.6% for overnight and 2.5% for rapid panels. The very major error rates were 8.8 and 7.2% for overnight and rapid panels, respectively. Total error rates were 3.6% for overnight and rapid gram-positive panels, These findings suggest that susceptibility results obtained from directly inoculated gram-negative overnight panels have the greatest correlation to those obtained by standard methods. When discrepant results occur with direct-susceptibility testing, they are more likely to show false susceptibility than false resistance.
引用
收藏
页码:2052 / 2056
页数:5
相关论文
共 18 条
[1]  
DEVITT KA, 1995, 9K GEN M AM SOC MICR, P60
[2]   DIRECT IDENTIFICATION AND SUSCEPTIBILITY TESTING OF GRAM-NEGATIVE BACILLI FROM BACTEC BOTTLES BY USE OF THE MS-2 SYSTEM WITH UPDATED BACTERIAL IDENTIFICATION SOFTWARE [J].
DIPERSIO, JR ;
FICORILLI, SM ;
VARGA, FJ .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY, 1984, 20 (06) :1202-1204
[3]   CLINICAL IMPACT OF RAPID IN-VITRO SUSCEPTIBILITY TESTING AND BACTERIAL IDENTIFICATION [J].
DOERN, GV ;
VAUTOUR, R ;
GAUDET, M ;
LEVY, B .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY, 1994, 32 (07) :1757-1762
[4]  
FAY D, 1979, J CLIN MICROBIOL, V9, P347
[5]  
HOWARD WJ, 1996, 96 GEN M AM SOC MICR, P56
[6]   COMPARISON OF DIRECT AND STANDARD MICROTITER BROTH DILUTION SUSCEPTIBILITY TESTING OF BLOOD CULTURE ISOLATES [J].
KIEHN, TE ;
CAPITOLO, C ;
ARMSTRONG, D .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY, 1982, 16 (01) :96-98
[7]   THE MICROSCAN WALKAWAY DIAGNOSTIC MICROBIOLOGY SYSTEM - AN EVALUATION [J].
MCGREGOR, A ;
SCHIO, F ;
BEATON, S ;
BOULTON, V ;
PERMAN, M ;
GILBERT, G .
PATHOLOGY, 1995, 27 (02) :172-176
[8]   COMPARISON OF DIRECT AND STANDARD ANTI-MICROBIAL DISK SUSCEPTIBILITY TESTING FOR BACTERIA ISOLATED FROM BLOOD [J].
MIRRETT, S ;
RELLER, LB .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY, 1979, 10 (04) :482-487
[9]   ANTIMICROBIAL SUSCEPTIBILITY TESTING AND BLOOD CULTURES [J].
MIRRETT, S .
CLINICS IN LABORATORY MEDICINE, 1994, 14 (01) :171-179
[10]   RAPID IDENTIFICATION AND ANTI-MICROBIAL SUSCEPTIBILITY TESTING OF GRAM-NEGATIVE BACILLI FROM BLOOD CULTURES BY THE AUTOMICROBIC SYSTEM [J].
MOORE, DF ;
HAMADA, SS ;
MARSO, E ;
MARTIN, WJ .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY, 1981, 13 (05) :934-939