International journal of antimicrobial agents · 2022
Head-to-head comparison of CLSI, EUCAST, Etest and VITEK®2 results for Candida auris susceptibility testing.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Ceballos-Garzon Andrés, Garcia-Effron Guillermo, Cordoba Susana, Rodriguez Jose Y, Alvarez-Moreno Carlos, Le Pape Patrice, Parra-Giraldo Claudia Marcela, Morales-López Soraya
Аннотация
The susceptibility of 31 Candida auris clinical isolates was evaluated by four methods, namely the microdilution reference method according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) and European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) guidelines as well as Etest and VITEK®2. Essential agreement between the two reference methods was 90%. Etest showed a better overall agreement with the reference methods (94% and 81% for CLSI and EUCAST, respectively) than VITEK®2 (70% and 72%, respectively). Discrepancies were found for fluconazole (FLC) and amphotericin B. Considering categorical agreement (CDC tentative breakpoints), the majority of isolates were considered FLC-resistant (93.6% and 80.6% by CLSI and EUCAST, respectively). Furthermore, all isolates were considered susceptible to echinocandins by all methods. Susceptibility results should be interpreted with care if the VITEK®2 system is used to guide therapeutic decisions for C. auris infections.