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 Colombo, A. L.
Right arrow Articles by Rinaldi, M. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Colombo, A. L.
Right arrow Articles by Rinaldi, M. G.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 03 1995, 535-540, Vol 33, No. 3
Copyright © 1995 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.

Comparison of Etest and National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards broth macrodilution method for azole antifungal susceptibility testing

AL Colombo, F Barchiesi, DA McGough and MG Rinaldi
Department of Pathology, University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, USA.

The use of Etest strips for antimicrobial susceptibility testing is a new and promising method with broad applications in microbiology. Since these strips contain a predefined continuous gradient of a drug, it is possible to obtain a reproducible, quantitative MIC reading. We performed a prospective and double-blinded study to compare the Etest and National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (Villanova, Pa.) broth macrodilution methods for determining the MICs of fluconazole, itraconazole, and ketoconazole for 100 clinical isolates (25 Candida albicans, 25 Cryptococcus neoformans var. neoformans, 20 Torulopsis [Candida] glabrata, 15 Candida tropicalis, and 15 Candida parapsilosis). The Etest method was performed according to the manufacturer's instructions, and the reference method was performed according to National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards document M27-P guidelines. Despite differences between results for some species-drug combinations, Etest and macrobroth MICs were, in general, in good agreement. The MIC agreement rates for the two methods, within +/- 1 dilution, were 71% for ketoconazole, 80% for fluconazole, and 84% for itraconazole. According to our data, Etest has potential utility as an alternative method.


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 © 1995 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.