闫笑梅, 何利华, 陶小霞, 张慧芳, 张建中. BIOMIC药敏分析系统对最小抑菌浓度判读能力的评价[J]. 疾病监测, 2009, 24(5): 370-372. DOI: 10.3784/j.issn.1003-9961.2009.05.019
引用本文: 闫笑梅, 何利华, 陶小霞, 张慧芳, 张建中. BIOMIC药敏分析系统对最小抑菌浓度判读能力的评价[J]. 疾病监测, 2009, 24(5): 370-372. DOI: 10.3784/j.issn.1003-9961.2009.05.019
YAN Xiao-mei, HE Li-hua, TAO Xiao-xia, ZHANG Hui-fang, ZHANG Jian-zhong. Evaluation on the MIC capability of BIOMIC antimicrobial susceptibility analyzing system to interpret minimal inhibitory concentration[J]. Disease Surveillance, 2009, 24(5): 370-372. DOI: 10.3784/j.issn.1003-9961.2009.05.019
Citation: YAN Xiao-mei, HE Li-hua, TAO Xiao-xia, ZHANG Hui-fang, ZHANG Jian-zhong. Evaluation on the MIC capability of BIOMIC antimicrobial susceptibility analyzing system to interpret minimal inhibitory concentration[J]. Disease Surveillance, 2009, 24(5): 370-372. DOI: 10.3784/j.issn.1003-9961.2009.05.019

BIOMIC药敏分析系统对最小抑菌浓度判读能力的评价

Evaluation on the MIC capability of BIOMIC antimicrobial susceptibility analyzing system to interpret minimal inhibitory concentration

  • 摘要: 目的评价BIOMIC药敏分析系统对耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌(methicillin-resistant IS.aureus,/IMRSA)最小抑菌浓度(minimal inhibitory concentration,MIC)的判读能力。方法用纸片扩散法检测50株MRSA对10种抗生素的敏感性,用BIOMIC药敏分析系统进行结果判读,与Etest结果进行比较,WHONET 5.4为分析软件。用BIOMIC推算的MIC值与Etest测得值的比值(BIOMIC MIC/Etest MIC)进一步比较两种方法测得的MIC一致性。结果两种方法测得庆大霉素结果( S、I、R)的一致率为98.00%,次要误差率为2.00%,其余抗生素结果( S、I、R)的一致率为100%。BIOMIC MIC/Etest MIC 比值分析结果为,MIC总一致率为83.92%。 结论BIOMIC分析系统和Etest方法对于检测MRSA具有较好一致性,尤其是药物敏感菌株,可以用于临床检测或耐药监测的初步判定。

     

    Abstract: ObjectiveTo evaluate the capability of BIOMIC antimicrobial susceptibility analyzing system to interpret the minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) of methicillin-resistant IS. aureus/I (MRSA). MethodsA total of 50 strains of MRSA were tested for their sensitivity to 10 different antibiotics via disk diffusion method. The results were interpreted by BIOMIC antimicrobial susceptibility analyzing system, and compared with the results obtained from Etest with the software of WHONET5.4. The ratio of MIC obtained from BIOMIC system and that measured via Etest method were calculated to evaluate the consistency of these two methods. ResultsGentamycin MIC (S, I, R) obtained from the two methods showed a consistency of 98.00%, with an error rate of 2.00%. MIC of other antibiotics (S, I, R) exhibited 100% consistency between the two methods. Based on the BIOMIC MIC/Etest MIC ratio, the total consistency of MIC was 83.92%. ConclusionBIOMIC analyzing system and Etest method show good consistency in testing MRSA, especially in testing sensitive strains. BIOMIC can be used to do preliminary judgments in clinical test for drug resistance or resistance surveillance.

     

/

返回文章
返回