Abstract
Automated microdilution MIC results, obtained with the Autoreader (Sensititre, Inc., Salem, N.H.) following 5 h of incubation, were compared with manually read, concurrent control MICs following 18 h of incubation in a three-laboratory comparative study. A total of 704 members of the family Enterobacteriaceae or similar gram-negative organisms were tested against 17 antimicrobial agents. Autoreader MICs were within 1 doubling dilution of control values in 92.9% of instances. Discrepancies of +/- 2 doubling dilutions and +/- 3 or greater doubling dilutions were noted in 4.5 and 2.6%, respectively, of the 7,687 drug-organism combinations analyzed. The majority of errors occurred when beta-lactam antimicrobial agents were tested with a variety of different species. MICs at 5 h, when Pseudomonas aeruginosa was used, were possible in only half the isolates tested and yielded data on only a limited number of drugs in the remaining instances. Excluding results obtained with penicillin and ampicillin, which were uniformly poor, Staphylococcus aureus Autoreader values were within +/- 1 doubling dilution of control values in 93.6% of instances, 5.4% varied by +/- 2 dilutions, and only 1% of test values by +/- 3 or more dilutions from control values for 82 isolates tested against nine antimicrobial agents. Of eight additional S. aureus isolates tested that were resistant to methicillin, only one was read correctly by the Autoreader, with results on the remaining seven appearing as either insufficient growth or as total resistance to all drugs tested. Interlaboratory reproducibility was excellent for selected isolates of S. aureus and gram-negative bacilli. The accuracy of the Sensititre Autoreader MIC results was comparable to that of other same-day quantitative systems for members of the family Enterobacteriaceae and S. aureus, while the economic and procedural advantages of the broth microdilution method was maintained.
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Aldridge K. E., Janney A., Sanders C. V., Marier R. L. Interlaboratory variation of antibiograms of methicillin-resistant and methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus strains with conventional and commercial testing systems. J Clin Microbiol. 1983 Nov;18(5):1226–1236. doi: 10.1128/jcm.18.5.1226-1236.1983. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Annear D. I. The effect of temperature on resistance of Staphylococcus aureus to methicillin and some other antibioics. Med J Aust. 1968 Mar 16;1(11):444–446. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Barry A. L., Braun L. E. Reader error in determining minimal inhibitory concentrations with microdilution susceptibility test panels. J Clin Microbiol. 1981 Jan;13(1):228–230. doi: 10.1128/jcm.13.1.228-230.1981. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Boyce J. M., White R. L., Bonner M. C., Lockwood W. R. Reliability of the MS-2 system in detecting methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. J Clin Microbiol. 1982 Feb;15(2):220–225. doi: 10.1128/jcm.15.2.220-225.1982. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Doern G. V., Staneck J. L., Needham C., Tubert T. Sensititre autoreader for same-day breakpoint broth microdilution susceptibility testing of members of the family Enterobacteriaceae. J Clin Microbiol. 1987 Aug;25(8):1481–1485. doi: 10.1128/jcm.25.8.1481-1485.1987. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Dudley M., Nauschuetz W. F., Juchau S. V. Clinical evaluation of new AMS GSC plus card. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 1983 Jun;1(2):139–143. doi: 10.1016/0732-8893(83)90043-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hewitt J. H., Coe A. W., Parker M. T. The detection of methicillin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus. J Med Microbiol. 1969 Nov 4;2(4):443–456. doi: 10.1099/00222615-2-4-443. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Johnson J. E., Jorgensen J. H., Crawford S. A., Redding J. S., Pruneda R. C. Comparison of two automated instrument systems for rapid susceptibility testing of gram-negative bacilli. J Clin Microbiol. 1983 Dec;18(6):1301–1309. doi: 10.1128/jcm.18.6.1301-1309.1983. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Johnson T. L., Forbes B. A., O'Connor-Scarlet M., Machinski A., McClatchey K. D. Rapid method of MIC determinations utilizing tetrazolium reduction. Am J Clin Pathol. 1985 Mar;83(3):374–378. doi: 10.1093/ajcp/83.3.374. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- McDougal L. K., Thornsberry C. The role of beta-lactamase in staphylococcal resistance to penicillinase-resistant penicillins and cephalosporins. J Clin Microbiol. 1986 May;23(5):832–839. doi: 10.1128/jcm.23.5.832-839.1986. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Schoenknecht F. D., Washington J. A., 2nd, Gavan T. L., Thornsberry C. Rapid determination of minimum inhibitory concentrations of antimicrobial agents by the Autobac method: a collaborative study. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1980 May;17(5):824–833. doi: 10.1128/aac.17.5.824. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Staneck J. L., Allen S. D., Harris E. E., Tilton R. C. Automated reading of MIC microdilution trays containing fluorogenic enzyme substrates with the Sensititre Autoreader. J Clin Microbiol. 1985 Aug;22(2):187–191. doi: 10.1128/jcm.22.2.187-191.1985. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Thornsberry C., Caruthers J. Q., Baker C. N. Effect of temperature on the in vitro susceptibility of Staphylococcus aureus to penicillinase-resistant penicillins. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1973 Sep;4(3):263–269. doi: 10.1128/aac.4.3.263. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Van Horn K. G., Vandernoot A. M., Burke E. W., McKitrick J. C. Evaluation of the AutoMicrobic system Gram-Negative General Susceptibility-Plus Card. J Clin Microbiol. 1984 Oct;20(4):630–635. doi: 10.1128/jcm.20.4.630-635.1984. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]