Advertisement

Evaluation of two media for antibiotic susceptibility testing of anaerobic bacteria using the receiver operating characteristic procedure

  • O. Castel
  • G. Grollier
  • G. Agius
  • G. Toullat
  • Y. de Rautlin de la Roy
Notes
  • 43 Downloads

Abstract

Wilkins-Chalgren agar and Meat-Yeast agar were evaluated as media for antibiotic susceptibility testing using 112 anaerobic bacterial strains. The results obtained with the two media using the diffusion method were compared with those obtained by the dilution method as reference method. The results were analyzed by the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) procedure allowing a graphic representation of sensitivity and specificity of the technique for each cut-off value. The area under the ROC curves was calculated to compare the accuracy of the two methods. Six antibiotics were tested including amoxicillin, cefoxitin, piperacillin, doxycycline and clindamycin. For amoxicillin and clindamycin, the two methods showed a high and identical discriminative power for distinguishing susceptible bacteria from the others. Diffusion in Wilkins-Chalgren agar appeared better than diffusion in Meat-Yeast agar for separating resistant bacteria from bacteria of intermediate susceptibility (amoxicillin p<0.005; clindamycin p<0.04). For other drugs, diffusion in Wilkins-Chalgren agar always had a discriminative power higher than that obtained with diffusion in Meat-Yeast agar for separating susceptible bacteria from the others (cefoxitin p<0.0005; piperacillin p<0.02; doxycycline p<0.05). The Wilkins-Chalgren agar medium thus appeared superior to the Meat-Yeast agar medium using the ROC evaluation method, which would deserve wider utilization in the field of microbiology.

Keywords

Agar Receiver Operating Characteristic Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve Amoxicillin Agar Medium 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Magot M Anaérobies: méthodologie. In: Courvalin P, Goldstein F, Philippon AS, Sirot J (ed): L'antibiogramme. Mpc-Vidéom, Paris, 1985, p. 133–138.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Breuil J, Burnat C, Patey O, Dublanchet A Survey ofBacteroides fragilis susceptibility patterns in France. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 1989, 24: 69–75.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tally FP, Cuhchural GJ Antibiotic resistance in anaerobic bacteria. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 1988, 22, Supplement A: 63–71.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Doubilet PM Statistical techniques for medical decision making: application to diagnostic radiology. American Journal of Roentgenology 1988, 150: 745–750.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Metz DE, Goodenough DJ, Rossmann K Evaluation of receiver operating characteristic curve data in terms of information theory, with applications in radiography. Radiology 1973, 109: 297–304.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Swet JA ROC analysis applied to the evaluation of medical imaging tests. Investigative Radiology 1986, 14: 109–121.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Carpenter MW, Coustan DR Criteria for screening tests for gestional diabetes. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1982, 144: 768–773.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Genner G, McNeil BJ Placental functions. Clinics in Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1986, 13: 521–552.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Herman AA, Irwig LM, Groeneveld HT Evaluating obstetric risk scores by receiver operating characteristic curves. American Journal of Epidemiology 1988, 127: 831–842.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Richardson DK, Prihoda TJ, Pouliot MR Sonographic amniotic fluid measurement and fetal growth retardation: a reappraisal. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1987, 157: 1406–1410.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Vinatier D, Monnier JC La courbe R.O.C. (receiver operating curve), une aide à la décision. Journal de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Biologie de la Reproduction 1988, 17:981–989.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hannequin P, Liehn JC, Delisle MJ, Deltour G, Valeyre J ROC analysis in radioimmunoassay: an application to the interpretation of thyroglobulin measurement in the follow-up of thyroid carcinoma. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine 1987, 13: 203–206.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kligfield P, Ameisen O, Okin PM Heart rate adjustment of ST segment depression for improved detection of coronary artery disease. Circulation 1989, 79: 248–255.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Thongkrajai P, Lulitanon V, Chamnanvanakit C Improved ELISA with immunoabsorbent purified mycobacterial antigen for serodiagnosis of tuberculosis. Journal of Medical Microbiology 1989, 30: 101–104.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Holdman LV, Cato EP, Moore WEC Anaerobe laboratory manual. Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Blacksburg, VA, 1977, p. 156.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Acar J, Bergogne-Bérézin E, Chabbert Y, Cluzel R, Courtieu A, Courvalin P, Dabernat H, Drugeon H, Duval J, Fleurette J, Morel CI, Philippon A, Sirot J, Soussy CJ, Thabaut A, Véron M Communiqué 1988 du Comité de l'Antibiogramme de la Société Française de Microbiologie. Pathologie Biologie 1988, 36: 1033–1036.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Levet PN Antimicrobial susceptibility ofClostridium difficile determined by disc diffusion and breakpoint methods. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 1988, 22: 167–173.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    McNeil B, Keeler E, Adelstein SJ Primer on certain elements of medical decision making. New England Journal of Medicine 1975, 293: 211–215.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Green D, Swet JA Signal detection theory and psychophysics. John Wiley, New York, 1966, p. 45–49.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bamber D The area above the ordinal dominance graph and the area below the receiver operating graph. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 1975, 12: 387–415.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hanley JA, McNeil B The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 1982, 143: 29–36.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hanley JA, McNeil B A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology 1983, 148: 839–843.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nettleman MD Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology 1988, 9: 374–377.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Swet JA, Pickett RM Evaluation of diagnostic systems: methods from signal detection theory. Academic Press, New York, 1982, p. 253.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Friedr. Vieweg & Sohn Verlagsgesellschaft mbH 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • O. Castel
    • 1
  • G. Grollier
    • 1
  • G. Agius
    • 1
  • G. Toullat
    • 1
  • Y. de Rautlin de la Roy
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratory of MicrobiologyUniversity Hospital Centre La MilétriePoitiers CédexFrance

Personalised recommendations