Skip to main content
PMC home page
Journal of Clinical Microbiology logoLink to Journal of Clinical Microbiology
. 1991 Jun;29(6):1089–1094. doi: 10.1128/jcm.29.6.1089-1094.1991

Comparison study of broth macrodilution and microdilution antifungal susceptibility tests.

A Espinel-Ingroff 1, T M Kerkering 1, P R Goldson 1, S Shadomy 1
PMCID: PMC269950  PMID: 1864923

Abstract

An evaluation of broth dilution antifungal susceptibility tests was performed by determining both the micro- and macrodilution MICs of amphotericin B, flucytosine, fluconazole, ketoconazole, and cilofungin against 38 isolates of Candida albicans, Candida lusitaniae, Candida parapsilosis, Candida tropicalis, Cryptococcus neoformans, and Torulopsis glabrata. The following preliminary antifungal working group recommendations of the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards for broth macrodilution tests with antifungal agents were used: inocula standardized to 1 x 10(4) to 5 x 10(4) CFU/ml with a spectrophotometer, RPMI 1640 medium buffered with morpholinopropanesulfonic acid (pH 7.0), incubation at 35 degrees C for 24 to 48 h, and an additive drug dilution procedure. Broth microdilution MICs were higher (two or more dilutions) than broth macrodilution MICs for all isolates tested with amphotericin B and for most isolates tested with ketoconazole, fluconazole, and cilofungin. MICs of flucytosine were the same by both techniques or lower by the broth microdilution test except in tests with C. neoformans. However, the only statistically significant differences between the two tests were observed with amphotericin B against all isolates (P = 0.01 to 0.07), ketoconazole against C. neoformans (P = 0.01 to 0.02), and cilofungin against C. albicans (P = 0.05 to 0.14). Tests performed with less dense inocula (1 x 10(3) to 5 x 10(3] produced similar results.

Full text

PDF
1089

Selected References

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

  1. Coleman T., Madassery J. V., Kobayashi G. S., Nahm M. H., Little J. R. New fluorescence assay for the quantitation of fungi. J Clin Microbiol. 1989 Sep;27(9):2003–2007. doi: 10.1128/jcm.27.9.2003-2007.1989. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Doern G. V., Tubert T. A., Chapin K., Rinaldi M. G. Effect of medium composition on results of macrobroth dilution antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts. J Clin Microbiol. 1986 Oct;24(4):507–511. doi: 10.1128/jcm.24.4.507-511.1986. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Eng C., Valenstein P. Standardization of yeast inocula with an electronic impedance counter. J Clin Microbiol. 1989 Oct;27(10):2397–2399. doi: 10.1128/jcm.27.10.2397-2399.1989. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Espinel-Ingroff A., Shadomy S. In vitro and in vivo evaluation of antifungal agents. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 1989 Apr;8(4):352–361. doi: 10.1007/BF01963469. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Galgiani J. N. Antifungal susceptibility tests. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1987 Dec;31(12):1867–1870. doi: 10.1128/aac.31.12.1867. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Galgiani J. N., Reiser J., Brass C., Espinel-Ingroff A., Gordon M. A., Kerkering T. M. Comparison of relative susceptibilities of Candida species to three antifungal agents as determined by unstandardized methods. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1987 Sep;31(9):1343–1347. doi: 10.1128/aac.31.9.1343. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Guinet R., Nerson D., de Closets F., Dupouy-Camet J., Kures L., Marjollet M., Poirot J. L., Ros A., Texier-Maugein J., Volle P. J. Collaborative evaluation in seven laboratories of a standardized micromethod for yeast susceptibility testing. J Clin Microbiol. 1988 Nov;26(11):2307–2312. doi: 10.1128/jcm.26.11.2307-2312.1988. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Hector R. F., Zimmer B. L., Pappagianis D. Microtiter method for MIC testing with spherule-endospore-phase Coccidioides immitis. J Clin Microbiol. 1988 Dec;26(12):2667–2668. doi: 10.1128/jcm.26.12.2667-2668.1988. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. McIntyre K. A., Galgiani J. N. In vitro susceptibilities of yeasts to a new antifungal triazole, SCH 39304: effects of test conditions and relation to in vivo efficacy. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1989 Jul;33(7):1095–1100. doi: 10.1128/aac.33.7.1095. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Pfaller M. A., Burmeister L., Bartlett M. S., Rinaldi M. G. Multicenter evaluation of four methods of yeast inoculum preparation. J Clin Microbiol. 1988 Aug;26(8):1437–1441. doi: 10.1128/jcm.26.8.1437-1441.1988. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Pfaller M. A., Rinaldi M. G., Galgiani J. N., Bartlett M. S., Body B. A., Espinel-Ingroff A., Fromtling R. A., Hall G. S., Hughes C. E., Odds F. C. Collaborative investigation of variables in susceptibility testing of yeasts. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1990 Sep;34(9):1648–1654. doi: 10.1128/aac.34.9.1648. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Radetsky M., Wheeler R. C., Roe M. H., Todd J. K. Microtiter broth dilution method for yeast susceptibility testing with validation by clinical outcome. J Clin Microbiol. 1986 Oct;24(4):600–606. doi: 10.1128/jcm.24.4.600-606.1986. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Ryley J. F., Wilson R. G., Barrett-Bee K. J. Azole resistance in Candida albicans. Sabouraudia. 1984;22(1):53–63. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

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

RESOURCES