Table 2.

MIC concordance of different assays compared to the reference BMD method

Method	BMD	Vitek 2®		UMIC		Colistin E-test MIC strip
Specie	No. Isolates tested	No. Isolates tested	No. of concordant isolates [%]a	No. Isolates tested	No. of concordant isolates [%]a	No. Isolates tested	No. of concordant isolates [%]a
Acinetobacter spp.	7	4	4 [100.0]	7	7 [100.0]	7	6 [85.7]
C. koseri	3	3	3 [100.0]	3	2 [66.7]	3	2 [66.7]
K. aerogenes	2	2	1 [50.0]	2	1 [50.0]	2	2 [100.0]
E. cloacae	5	5	3 [60.0]	5	5 [100.0]	5	3 [60.0]
E. coli	24	24	17 [70.8]	24	19 [79.2]	24	13 [54.2]
Hafnia spp.	15	15	14 [93.3]	15	14 [93.3]	15	13 [86.7]
K. oxytoca	3	3	1 [33.3]	3	3 [100.0]	3	1 [33.3]
K. pneumoniae	20	19	16 [84.2]	20	17 [85.0]	20	13 [65.0]
P. aeruginosa	10	8	7 [87.5]	10	10 [100.0]	10	8 [80.0]
Total	97	91	66 [72.5]	97	78 [80.4]	97	61 [62.9]

BMD Broth microdilution method

^aConcordance was considered as the same MIC value or as one titre difference to that of the reference value obtained by BMD