Skip to main content
Journal of Clinical Microbiology logoLink to Journal of Clinical Microbiology
. 1983 Jul;18(1):10–14. doi: 10.1128/jcm.18.1.10-14.1983

Lyophilized microculture susceptibility test for ketoconazole, miconazole, clotrimazole, and griseofulvin against dermatophytes.

T C Granade, M A Mothershead, W M Artis
PMCID: PMC270735  PMID: 6309896

Abstract

A lyophilized microculture antimycotic susceptibility testing system for ketoconazole, miconazole, griseofulvin, and clotrimazole is described. Microculture plates were loaded with 100 microliters of medium and 10 microliters of appropriate concentrations of the four antimycotics and were lyophilized to complete dryness. The lyophilized plates were stored at -70 degrees C or 4 degrees C or in a desiccator at 25 degrees C. Samples from each storage condition were rehydrated at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, and 12 months and inoculated with Trichophyton mentagrophytes (Robin) Blanchard ATCC 18748. All of the minimal inhibitory concentrations (MICs) generated from the lyophilized microcultures were within one experimental dilution of MICs derived from fresh microcultures. The ability of reconstituted lyophilized microcultures to consistently produce MICs comparable to MICs derived from fresh microcultures was characterized. Nine dermatophyte isolates were tested five times each over a 70-day period. The MICs derived were reproducible and comparable to MICs determined by freshly prepared microculture tests. Lyophilization of freshly prepared antimycotic-containing microcultures does not alter the MIC resolution of the testing system and provides an effective method of storage of prepared antimycotic tests for ketoconazole, miconazole, clotrimazole, and griseofulvin.

Full text

PDF
10

Selected References

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

  1. Artis W. M., Odle B. M., Jones H. E. Griseofulvin-resistant dermatophytosis correlates with in vitro resistance. Arch Dermatol. 1981 Jan;117(1):16–19. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Dixon D. M., Wagner G. E., Shadomy S., Shadomy H. J. In vitro comparison of the antifungal activities of R34,000, miconazole and amphotericin B. Chemotherapy. 1978;24(6):364–367. doi: 10.1159/000237809. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Granade T. C., Artis W. M. Antimycotic susceptibility testing of dermatophytes in microcultures with a standardized fragmented mycelial inoculum. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1980 Apr;17(4):725–729. doi: 10.1128/aac.17.4.725. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Granade T. C., Artis W. M. Factors affecting griseofulvin susceptibility testing of Trichophyton rubrum in microcultures. J Clin Microbiol. 1982 Dec;16(6):1043–1047. doi: 10.1128/jcm.16.6.1043-1047.1982. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Odds F. C., Milne L. J., Gentles J. C., Ball E. H. The activity in vitro and in vivo of a new imidazole antifungal, ketoconazole. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1980 Jan;6(1):97–104. doi: 10.1093/jac/6.1.97. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Odds F. C. Problems in the laboratory assessment of antifungal activity. Postgrad Med J. 1979 Sep;55(647):677–680. doi: 10.1136/pgmj.55.647.677. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Reinhardt J. H., Allen A. M., Gunnison D., Akers W. A. Experimental human Trichophyton mentagrophytes infections. J Invest Dermatol. 1974 Nov;63(5):419–422. doi: 10.1111/1523-1747.ep12676579. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Young C. N. Sensitivity patterns to griseofulvin of Trichophyton rubrum and other ringworm fungi. Trans St Johns Hosp Dermatol Soc. 1972;58(2):226–234. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

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

RESOURCES