4.7 Article

In vitro antifungal drug susceptibilities of dermatophytes microconidia and arthroconidia

期刊

JOURNAL OF ANTIMICROBIAL CHEMOTHERAPY
卷 62, 期 4, 页码 758-761

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jac/dkn245

关键词

antifungal susceptibility; dermatophytoses; MICs; Trichophyton

资金

  1. FAPESP
  2. CAPES
  3. CNPq
  4. FAEPA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: Arthroconidia have been considered as the primary cause of infection by dermatophytes. However, the in vitro antifungal testing evaluates the responses mainly of microconidia or hyphae, and dermatophytes in vivo often produce arthroconidia, a cellular structure presumably more resistant to antifungals. The aim of this study was to compare the in vitro susceptibility of microconidia and arthroconidia of Trichophyton rubrum, Trichophyton tonsurans and Trichophyton equinum to griseofulvin, itraconazole, terbinafine, fluconazole, amphotericin B and hygromycin B. Methods: Microconidia and arthroconidia were produced in vitro, and their susceptibility to each drug was evaluated by assessing the CLSI M38-A broth microdilution method. Results: Arthroconidia of all strains analysed appeared to be more resistant to fluconazole, griseofulvin and itraconazole than microconidia. The MIC of terbinafine was the same for microconidia and arthroconidia for all strains, and the MIC of amphotericin B for microconidia and arthroconidia was the same for isolates of T. equinum and T. tonsurans, but differed for T. rubrum. Finally, the level of resistance of microconidia for all strains towards the antibiotic hygromycin B was from 25 to 400 mg/L. Conclusions: The difference in the susceptibility between microconidia and arthroconidia depends on the drug and on the strain, and may be one of the causes of therapeutic failure. Also, the level of resistance to the antibiotic hygromycin B presented by microconidia of these isolates will allow the use of hygromycin resistance as a dominant marker in fungal transformation procedures in future studies of gene function.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据