JCM Figure table search 04
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jorgensen, J H
Right arrow Articles by Maher, L A
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Jorgensen, J H
Right arrow Articles by Maher, L A
J Clin Microbiol. 1991 January; 29(1): 109-114

Quantitative antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Haemophilus influenzae and Streptococcus pneumoniae by using the E-test.

J H Jorgensen, A W Howell and L A Maher

Department of Pathology, University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio 78284-7750.

ABSTRACT

The E-test (PDM Epsilometer; AB Biodisk, Solna, Sweden) is an antimicrobial agent gradient-coated plastic test strip which allows MIC determinations on agar media. The test is performed in a manner similar to the agar disk diffusion procedure. A collection of Haemophilus influenzae and Streptococcus pneumoniae strains possessing various resistance mechanisms was used to evaluate the E-test method. H. influenzae strains were tested with both Haemophilus test medium (HTM) and PDM ASM II chocolate agar, while the S. pneumoniae strains were tested on Mueller-Hinton sheep blood agar. E-test MICs for a total of 10 antimicrobial agents were compared with broth microdilution MICs determined according to National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards methods. In general, E-test MICs for both species were quickly and easily interpreted and agreed within one log2 MIC increment in 89.8% of tests with H. influenzae and in 80.4% of pneumococcal tests. The majority of disagreements between the E-test and conventional MICs occurred with trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole because of trailing and diffuse E-test MIC endpoints with both species. Ampicillin MICs for beta-lactamase-producing H. influenzae determined by the E-test differed at times from those determined by conventional testing because of the vagaries of interpreting colonies growing within the E-test inhibition ellipses. E-test penicillin MICs for pneumococci tended to be 1 to 2 log2 dilutions lower than those determined by using Mueller-Hinton broth supplemented with lysed horse blood. Nevertheless, strains of both species with documented resistance to the study drugs were detected by E-tests, i.e., 0.7% of the tests had very major errors with H. influenzae and 0.8% had very major errors with S. pneumoniae. Thus, the E-test represents a potential alternative method for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of these two fastidious bacterial species.

J Clin Microbiol. 1991 January; 29(1): 109-114




This article has been cited by other articles:



Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. Clin. Microbiol. Rev.
Clin. Vaccine Immunol. ALL ASM JOURNALS

Copyright © 1991 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.