Advertisement

Evaluation of five commercial antifungal susceptibility testing systems

  • A. Druetta
  • A. Freydiere
  • R. Guinet
  • Y. Gille
Article

Abstract

Five commercial antifungal susceptibility testing systems were studied for repeatability and reproducibility as well as concordance of results with the MICs for ten reference strains belonging to six different species. Repeatability was determined by testing each strain in triplicate on the same day, and reproducibility by repeating this triple determination on three different days. On the basis of 630 yeast-antifungal agent results for Mycototal and Mycostandard, 540 for Candifast, and 450 for ATB Fungus and Diff Test, repeatability was consistently equal to or greater than 95 %. Reproducibility was 80.07 % for Candifast and greater than 95 % for the other systems. The concordance with the reference MICs was 51.65 % for Candifast, 75.33 % for ATB Fungus, 80.89 % for Diff Test, 90.16 % for Mycostandard and 90.32 % for Mycototal. Although the performance of Diff Test and ATB Fungus was satisfactory, Mycototal and Mycostandard gave notably better results with imidazoles. Mycostandard, which is easier to use and includes tests for fluconazole and itraconazole, would seem to be potentially the most useful antifungal susceptibility test available at present.

Keywords

Internal Medicine Imidazole Fluconazole Itraconazole Reference Strain 
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.
    Dupouy-Camet J, Paugam A, Tourte-Schaefer C Yeast susceptibility testing. Lancet 1991, 338: 383.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Shadomy S, Pfaller MA Laboratory studies with antifungal agents: susceptibility tests and quantification in body fluids. In: Balows A, Hausler WJ, Herrmann K, Isenberg HD, Shadomy HJ (ed): Manual of clinical microbiology. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, DC, 1991, p. 1173–1183.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Drouhet E, Dupont B Actualité sur les antifongiques en 1989. Revue Française des Laboratoires 1989, 197: 60–68.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Espinel-Ingroff A, Shadomy S In vitro and in vivo evaluation of antifungal agents. European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases 1989, 8: 352–361.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Graybill JR, Craven PC Antifungal agents used in systemic mycoses. Activity and therapeutic use. Drugs 1983, 25: 41–62.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Plempel M, Berg D, Buchel KH, Abbink D Test methods for antifungal agents. A critical review. Mykosen 1987, 30: 20–37.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Vermorel O, Lebeau B, Claustre F, Grillot R Antifongigramme: evaluation comparative de cinq techniques commercialisées. Bulletin de la Société Française de Mycologie Médicale 1988, 17: 417–420.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Doern GV, Tubert TA, Chapin K, Rinaldi MG Effect of medium composition on results of macrobroth dilution antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1986, 24: 507–511.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Guinet R, Nerson D, De Closets F, Dupouy-Camet J, Kures L, Marjollet M, Poirot JL, Ros A, Texier-Maugein J, Volle PJ Collaborative evaluation in seven laboratories of standardized micromethod for yeast susceptibility testing. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1988, 26: 2307–2312.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Espinel-Ingroff A, Kerkering TM, Goldson PR, Shadomy S Comparison study of both macrodilution and microdilution antifungal susceptibility tests. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1991, 29: 1089–1094.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Drouhet E, Dupont B Standardisation de l'antibiogramme antifongique. Rapport du groupe d'etudes de la Société Française de Mycologie Médicale. Bulletin de la Société Française de Mycologie Médicale 1981, 10: 131–134.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Utz CJ, Shadomy S Antifungal activity of 5-fluorocytosine as measured by disc diffusion susceptibility testing. Journal of Infectious Diseases 1977, 135: 970–974.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Guinet R Micromethode standardisée pour la determination de la sensibilité aux antifongiques. Medecine et Maladies Infectieuses 1984, 14: 626.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Guinet R Sensibilité comparée des levures aux antifongiques en microméthode standardisée. Pathologie Biologie 1986, 34: 536–539.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shadomy S, Espinel-Ingroff A, Cartwright RY Laboratory studies with antifungal agents: susceptibility tests and bioassays. In: Lennette EH, Balows A, Hausler WJ, Shadomy HJ (ed): Manual of clinical microbiology. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, DC, 1985, p. 991–999.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Holt RJ, Azmi A Miconazole resistantCandida. Lancet 1978, i: 50–51.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Johnson EM, Richard MD, Warnock DN In vitro resistance to imidazole antifungals inCandida albicans. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 1984, 15: 69–75.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Riley JF, Wilson RG, Barett-Bee J Azole resistance inCandida albicans. Sabouraudia 1984, 22: 53–63.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Iwata K Drug resistance in human pathogenic fungi. In: Iwata K, Van Den Bossche H (ed): In vitro and in vivo evaluation of antifungal agents. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1986, p. 65–86.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Guinet R, Marlier H Sensibilité desAspergillus au ketoconazole et à l'itraconazole en microméthode standardisée. Pathologie Biologie 1990, 38: 572–574.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Guinet R, Marlier H Sensibilité comparée des levures aux ketoconazole, itraconazole, et fluconazole en microméthode standardisée, en milieu liquide. Pathologie Biologie 1990, 38: 575–578.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Odds FC, Cheesman SL, Abott AB Antifungal effects of fluconazole (UK 49.858), a new triazole antifungal, in vitro. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 1986, 18: 473–478.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Friedr. Vieweg & Sohn Verlagsgesellschaft mbH 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Druetta
    • 1
  • A. Freydiere
    • 1
  • R. Guinet
    • 2
  • Y. Gille
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratoire de MicrobiologieHopital de l'Antiquaille, Institut Pasteur de LyonLyon Cedex 5France
  2. 2.Centre d'Immunochimie MicrobienneInstitut Pasteur, Domaine du Poirier, LentillyL'ArbresleFrance

Personalised recommendations