Journals / İnfeksiyon Dergisi / 2005 / Cilt: 19 - Sayı: 4

Evaluation of microdilution method using high resolution medium for antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts

Mayaların antifungal duyarlılıklarının araştırılmasında "High resolution" besiyeri kullanılan mikrodilüsyon yöntemlerinin değerlendirilmesi

Pages
445–451
Publication Date
2022-10-17
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Overall results of both methods were considered to be in agreement when the MIC values were within ±2 fold dilutions.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:he current study was undertaken to evaluate the microdilution method using high resolution medium for the susceptibility testing of yeasts.
📊
Key Findings & Data:A total of 194 yeast isolates (78 Candida albicans, 42 C. glabrata, 33 C. tropicalis, 18 C. parapsilosis, 11 C. krusei, three C. guilliermondii and nine Trichosporon spp.) that were recovered from various clinical specimens were included.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Overall results of both methods were considered to be in agreement when the MIC values were within ±2 fold dilutions.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

he current study was undertaken to evaluate the microdilution method using high resolution medium for the susceptibility testing of yeasts. A total of 194 yeast isolates (78 Candida albicans, 42 C. glabrata, 33 C. tropicalis, 18 C. parapsilosis, 11 C. krusei, three C. guilliermondii and nine Trichosporon spp.) that were recovered from various clinical specimens were included. The susceptibilities of the isolates against amphotericin B, fluconazole and ketoconazole were determined by microdilution methods using RPMI 1640 medium buffered with MOPS and high resolution medium buffered with phosphate buffer. Overall results of both methods were considered to be in agreement when the MIC values were within ±2 fold dilutions. The agreement rates of MIC values of amphotericin B, fluconazole and ketoconazole were 84%, 62% and 81%, respectively. The agreement rates for the susceptibility categories of amphotericin B and fluconazole were 95% and 70%. As a result, it is concluded that high resolution medium can be used in the microdilution method when determining the susceptibilities especially susceptibility categories of Candida and Trichosporon spp. against amphotericin B, fluconazole and ketoconazole.

Özet

Bu çalışma, maya mantarlarının antifungal duyarlılık testlerinde "high resolution" besiyerinin kullanıldığı mikrodilüsyon yöntemini değerlendirmek için gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışmaya çeşitli klinik örneklerden soyutlanan toplam 194 maya kökeni (78 Candida albicans, 42 C. glabrata, 33 C. tropicalis, 18 C. parapsilosis, 11 C. krusei, üç C. guilliermondii ve dokuz Trichosporon spp.) alın­mıştır. Kökenlerin amfoterisin B, flukonazol ve ketokonazole karşı duyarlılıkları MOPS ile tamponlanan RPMI 1640 ve fosfat tamponu ile tamponlanan "high resolution" besiyerlerinin kullanıldığı iki mikrodilüsyon yöntemi ile araştırılmıştır. İki farklı besiyeri ile belirlenen MİK değerleri ±2 kat dilüsyon içerisinde ise uyumlu olarak kabul edilmiştir. Amfoterisin B, flukonazol ve ketokonazol MİK'leri için ±2 dilüsyon içerisindeki MİK değerlerinin uyum oranları sırasıyla %84, %62 ve %81 olarak saptanmıştır. Amfoterisin B ve flukonazol duyarlılık kategorileri için ise uyum oranları %95 ve %70 olarak belirlenmiştir. Sonuç olarak, mikrodilüsyon yönteminde "high resolution" besiyerinin Candida ve Trichosporon türlerinin amfoterisin B, flukonazol ve ketokonazole karşı duyarlılıklarının, özellikle kategorilerinin belirlenmesinde kullanılabileceği görüşüne varılmıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

YÜCESOY, M., ERGON, M. C. (2022). Evaluation of microdilution method using high resolution medium for antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts. İnfeksiyon Dergisi, Cilt: 19 - Sayı: 4, 445–451. https://ajindex.com/articles/546488

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (9)

  1. Fridkin SK, Jarvis WR. Epidemiology of nosocomial fungal infections. Clin Microbiol Rev 1996
  2. Beck-Sague CM, Jarvis WR. The National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance System. Secular trends in the epidemiology of nosocomial fungal infections in the United States, 1980-1990. J Infect Dis 1993
  3. Pfaller MA, Jones RN, Doern GV, et al. Bloodstream infections due to Candida species: SENTRY antimicrobial surveillance program in North America and Latin America, 1997-1998. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2000
  4. Stevens DA, Bennet JA. Antifungal agents. In: Mandell GL, Bennett JE, Dolin R, eds. Principles and Practice of Infectious Diseases. 5th ed. Pennsylvania: Churchill Livingstone, 2000: 448-59. 5.Rinaldi MG. Laboratory evaluation of antifungal agents: A brief overview. Clin Infect Dis 1992
  5. 14 (Suppl 1): 130-3. 6.Sheehan DJ, Espinel-lngroff A, Moore LS, Webb CD. Antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts: A brief overview. Clin Infect Dis 1993
  6. 17 (Suppl 2): 494-500. 7.National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. Reference method for broth dilution antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts
  7. Approved standard-second edition. NCCLS document M27-A2 Vol 22, No. 15, Wayne, PA: NCCLS, 2002. 8.Hazen KC, Howell SA. Candida, Cryptococcus and other yeasts of medical importance. In: Murray PR, Baron EJ, Jorgensen JH, Pfaller MA, Yolken RH, eds. Manual of Clinical Microbiology. 8th ed. Washington, DC: ASM Press, 2003: 1693-711. 9.Larone DH. Medically Important Fungi: A Guide to Identification. 4th ed. Washington, DC: ASM press, 2002: 111 -43. 10.Troke PF, Pye GW. Antifungal Susceptibility Testing. A Manual of Methods in Development (FLU-92-010MM). Sandwich, UK: Pfizer Central Research, 1992. 11.Espinel-lngroff AV, Pfaller MA. Susceptibility test methods: Yeasts and filamentous fungi. In: Murray PR, Baron EJ, Jorgensen JH, Pfaller MA, Yolken RH, eds. Manual of Clinical Microbiology. 8th ed. Washington, DC: ASM Press, 2003: 1880-93. 12.Peyron F, Favel A, Michel-Nguyen A, Gilly M, Regli P, Bolmstro A. Improved detection of amphotericin B-resistant isolates of Candida lusitaniae by Etest. J Clin Microbiol 2001
  8. Rex JH, Cooper Jr, CR, Mere WG, Galgiani JN, Anaissie EJ. Detection of amphotericin B-resistant Candida isolates in a broth-based system. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1995
  9. Law D, Moore CB, Denning DW. Amphotericin B resistance testing of Candida spp.: a comparison of methods. J Antimicrob