Revista iberoamericana de micologia · 2013
[Influence of the ecological group on the in vitro antifungal susceptibility of dermatophytic fungi].
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Carrillo-Muñoz Alfonso Javier, Tur-Tur Cristina, Cárdenes Delia, Rojas Florencia, Giusiano Gustavo
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Dermatophytes can be divided into geophilic (soil), zoophilic (animals) and anthropophilic (humans) strains, depending on the source of the keratin that they use for nutritional purposes.
AIMS: The in vitro susceptibility of clinical isolates of dermatophyte fungi has been studied in the 3 ecological groups with several antifungal agents for the topical management of dermatophytoses in order to determine their relationship with the ecological group.
METHODS: A standardised dilution micromethod in a liquid medium was used for the determination of the in vitro antifungal activity of 9 topical antifungal drugs: amorolfine (AMR), bifonazole (BFZ), clotrimazole, econazole, ketoconazole, miconazole, oxiconazole, terbinafine (TRB) and tioconazole. The in vitro activity was obtained against 124 clinical isolates of dermatophyte moulds from the anthropophilic, zoophilic and geophilic ecological groups.
RESULTS: The in vitro antifungal activity was different depending on the ecological group, although a species-dependent profile was also observed.
CONCLUSIONS: Azole derivatives showed a similar antifungal profile, being more active against anthropophilic dermatophytes > zoophilic > geophilic. Activity of TRB and AMR was different from that of azole derivatives (zoophilic > anthropophilic > geophilic). A higher in vitro antifungal activity against the 3 ecological groups was observed with TRB and AMR, whilst BFZ was the less active drug.
AIMS: The in vitro susceptibility of clinical isolates of dermatophyte fungi has been studied in the 3 ecological groups with several antifungal agents for the topical management of dermatophytoses in order to determine their relationship with the ecological group.
METHODS: A standardised dilution micromethod in a liquid medium was used for the determination of the in vitro antifungal activity of 9 topical antifungal drugs: amorolfine (AMR), bifonazole (BFZ), clotrimazole, econazole, ketoconazole, miconazole, oxiconazole, terbinafine (TRB) and tioconazole. The in vitro activity was obtained against 124 clinical isolates of dermatophyte moulds from the anthropophilic, zoophilic and geophilic ecological groups.
RESULTS: The in vitro antifungal activity was different depending on the ecological group, although a species-dependent profile was also observed.
CONCLUSIONS: Azole derivatives showed a similar antifungal profile, being more active against anthropophilic dermatophytes > zoophilic > geophilic. Activity of TRB and AMR was different from that of azole derivatives (zoophilic > anthropophilic > geophilic). A higher in vitro antifungal activity against the 3 ecological groups was observed with TRB and AMR, whilst BFZ was the less active drug.