4.7 Article

Drug susceptibility testing of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex by use of a high-throughput, reproducible, absolute concentration method

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 45, 期 8, 页码 2662-2668

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.00244-07

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Accurate drug susceptibility testing (DST) for Mycobacterium tuberculosis is highly important for both therapy guidance and surveillance of drug resistance. Although liquid medium DST methods are used increasingly and seem most efficient and fast, the high costs hamper widespread implementation. In addition, an inability to check the colony morphology of the growing bacteria is a disadvantage of these methods. Moreover, these methods discriminate only between susceptibility and resistance and do not determine the MIC. In this paper, we describe a low-cost, reproducible, high-throughput, proportional absolute concentration DST method. The method uses a concentration series of antituberculosis drugs, including pyrazinamide in 71110 medium, distributed semiautomatically in 25-well plates. The performance of this 25-well DST method was evaluated by the World Health Organization and the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease in 10 rounds of proficiency testing regarding sensitivity, specificity, efficiency, reproducibility, and predictive value for resistance and susceptibility. The performance of the method for these characteristics was 100% for isoniazid and from 96 to 100% for rifampin, 91 to 100% for streptomycin, and 85 to 100% for ethambutol. The method was 100% reproducible for all four drugs. The levels of drug resistance and the MIC distributions for the first-line antituberculosis drugs were determined for all 7,956 M. tuberculosis strains isolated in The Netherlands from 1998 to 200 and amounted to 7.5% for isoniazid, 1.4% for rifampin, 8.5% for streptomycin, and 1.0% for ethambutol. Pyrazinamide testing was successful for 7,026 (88.3%) of the isolates and showed a resistance level of 0.8%.

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