Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Journal of Clinical Microbiology logoLink to Journal of Clinical Microbiology
. 1995 Jan;33(1):146–148. doi: 10.1128/jcm.33.1.146-148.1995

Suggested modifications for disk diffusion susceptibility testing criteria for levofloxacin and sparfloxacin following tests with a predictor panel of ciprofloxacin-resistant clinical isolates.

L D Sutton 1, R N Jones 1
PMCID: PMC227897  PMID: 7699031

Abstract

A predictor panel of 300 clinical bacterial isolates (200 resistant to ciprofloxacin) was used to compare 5-micrograms disk diffusion test results with the MICs of ofloxacin (control), levofloxacin, and sparfloxacin. Regression analysis demonstrated high correlations between the methods for all three fluoroquinolones (r > or = 0.95). In order to minimize disk diffusion testing errors among the fluoroquinolone-resistant strains, the following modifications to previously proposed or published interpretive criteria were suggested: for levofloxacin, susceptible at > or = 17 mm (< or = 2 micrograms/ml) and resistant at < or = 13 mm (> or = 8 micrograms/ml); for sparfloxacin, susceptible at > or = 20 mm (< or = 1 microgram/ml) and resistant at < or = 16 mm (> or = 4 micrograms/ml). The study control drug, ofloxacin, did not appear to possess a significant error rate (5% minor error) when fluoroquinolone-resistant strains were tested, and no modifications were proposed. Under these proposed interpretive criteria, the absolute categorical agreements between standardized susceptibility testing methods for levofloxacin and sparfloxacin results were 91.3 and 94.0%, respectively (< or = 0.3% major errors and nil very major errors).

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (184.0 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Bradford P. A., Sanders C. C. Use of a predictor panel for development of a new disk for diffusion tests with cefoperazone-sulbactam. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1992 Feb;36(2):394–400. doi: 10.1128/aac.36.2.394. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Cooper M. A., Andrews J. M., Ashby J. P., Matthews R. S., Wise R. In-vitro activity of sparfloxacin, a new quinolone antimicrobial agent. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1990 Nov;26(5):667–676. doi: 10.1093/jac/26.5.667. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Eliopoulos G. M., Klimm K., Grayson M. L. In vitro activity of sparfloxacin (AT-4140, CI-978, PD 131501), a new quinolone antimicrobial agent. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 1990 Jul-Aug;13(4):345–348. doi: 10.1016/0732-8893(90)90029-u. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Fu K. P., Lafredo S. C., Foleno B., Isaacson D. M., Barrett J. F., Tobia A. J., Rosenthale M. E. In vitro and in vivo antibacterial activities of levofloxacin (l-ofloxacin), an optically active ofloxacin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1992 Apr;36(4):860–866. doi: 10.1128/aac.36.4.860. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Fuchs P. C., Barry A. L., Pfaller M. A. Tentative interpretive criteria for disk diffusion susceptibility testing of sparfloxacin. J Clin Microbiol. 1993 Aug;31(8):2236–2237. doi: 10.1128/jcm.31.8.2236-2237.1993. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Fuchs P. C., Jones R. N., Barry A. L., Gavan T. L. Ofloxacin susceptibility testing quality control parameters for microdilution and disk diffusion, and confirmation of disk diffusion interpretive criteria. J Clin Microbiol. 1989 Jan;27(1):49–52. doi: 10.1128/jcm.27.1.49-52.1989. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Johnson J. H., Cooper M. A., Andrews J. M., Wise R. Pharmacokinetics and inflammatory fluid penetration of sparfloxacin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1992 Nov;36(11):2444–2446. doi: 10.1128/aac.36.11.2444. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Kayser F. H., Wüst J. Interpretive criteria for disk diffusion susceptibility testing of sparfloxacin. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 1991 Mar;10(3):163–166. doi: 10.1007/BF01964449. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Metzler C. M., DeHaan R. M. Susceptibility tests of anaerobic bacteria: statistical and clinical considerations. J Infect Dis. 1974 Dec;130(6):588–594. doi: 10.1093/infdis/130.6.588. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Nakamura S., Minami A., Nakata K., Kurobe N., Kouno K., Sakaguchi Y., Kashimoto S., Yoshida H., Kojima T., Ohue T. In vitro and in vivo antibacterial activities of AT-4140, a new broad-spectrum quinolone. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1989 Aug;33(8):1167–1173. doi: 10.1128/aac.33.8.1167. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Nogita T., Ishibashi Y. The penetration of sparfloxacin into human plasma and skin tissues. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1991 Aug;28(2):313–314. doi: 10.1093/jac/28.2.313. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Pfaller M. A., Barry A. L., Fuchs P. C. Levofloxacin disk potency and tentative interpretive criteria for susceptibility tests. J Clin Microbiol. 1993 Jul;31(7):1924–1926. doi: 10.1128/jcm.31.7.1924-1926.1993. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Simor A. E., Fuller S. A., Low D. E. Comparative in vitro activities of sparfloxacin (CI-978; AT-4140) and other antimicrobial agents against staphylococci, enterococci, and respiratory tract pathogens. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1990 Nov;34(11):2283–2286. doi: 10.1128/aac.34.11.2283. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Une T., Fujimoto T., Sato K., Osada Y. In vitro activity of DR-3355, an optically active ofloxacin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1988 Sep;32(9):1336–1340. doi: 10.1128/aac.32.9.1336. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Clinical Microbiology are provided here courtesy of American Society for Microbiology (ASM)

RESOURCES