4.2 Article

Antimicrobial susceptibility testing for Helicobacter pylori isolates from Brazilian children and adolescents: Comparing agar dilution, E-test, and disk diffusion

期刊

BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF MICROBIOLOGY
卷 45, 期 4, 页码 1439-1448

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1590/S1517-83822014000400039

关键词

Helicobacter pylori; E-test; disk diffusion; susceptibility test

资金

  1. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo - FAPESP

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Antimicrobial susceptibility testing for Helicobacter pylori is increasingly important due to resistance to the most used antimicrobials agents. Only agar dilution method is approved by CLSI, but it is difficult to perform routinely. We evaluated the reliability of E-test and disk diffusion comparing to agar dilution method on Helicobacter pylori antimicrobial susceptibility testing. Susceptibility testing was performed for amoxicillin, clarithromycin, furazolidone, metronidazole and tetracycline using E-test, disk-diffusion and agar dilution method in 77 consecutive Helicobacter pylori strains from dyspeptic children and adolescents. Resistance rates were: amoxicillin - 10.4%, 9% and 68.8%; clarithromycin - 19.5%, 20.8%, 36.3%; metronidazole - 40.2% 33.7%, 38.9%, respectively by agar dilution, E-test and disk diffusion method. Furazolidone and tetracycline showed no resistance rates. Metronidazole presented strong correlation to E-test (r = 0.7992, p < 0.0001) and disk diffusion method (r=-0.6962, p < 0.0001). Clarithromycin presented moderate correlation to E-test (r = 0.6369, p < 0.0001) and disk diffusion method (r=-0.5656, p < 0.0001). Amoxicillin presented weak correlation to E-test (r = 0.3565, p = 0.0015) and disk diffusion (r=-0.3565, p = 0.0015). Tetracycline presented weak correlation with E-test (r = 0.2346, p = 0.04) and furazolidone to disk diffusion (r=-0.0288, p = 0.8038). E-test presented better agreement with gold standard. It is an easy and reliable method for Helicobacter pylori susceptibility testing. Disk diffusion method presented high disagreement and high rates of major errors.

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

4.2
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