Abstract
The approach to administration of antimicrobials is often based on the results of microbiological studies that include microorganism isolation, identification and, most important, susceptibility testing. Majority of microbiological laboratories in Russia for the susceptibility testing use disk-diffusion method. This method is technically simple and has good reproducibility. But at the same time there are some specific features that may lead to incorrect results. In present article the main specificities of disk-diffusion method as well as common sources of incorrect results are indicated, practical recommendations for the improvement of quality of susceptibility testing by disk-diffusion method are given.
-
1.
Vandepitte J., Engbaek K., Piot P., Heuck C.C. Basic laboratory procedures in clinical bacteriology. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1991.
-
2.
Barry A.L., Thornsberry C. Susceptibility tests: Diffusion test procedures. In: Murray P., editor. Diffusion test procedures. Washington D.C.: ASM Press; 1993.
-
3.
National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. Development of in vitro susceptibility testing criteria and quality control parameters. Approved guideline. NCCLS Document M23-A. 1994; 12 (16).
-
4.
Сидоренко С.В. Клиническое значение резистентности микроорганизмов к антимикробным препаратам. Рос мед вести 1998; 1:28-34.
-
5.
National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing; eleventh informational supplement. 2001; 21(1).
-
6.
Sabath L.D., Toftegaard I. Rapid microassays for cand gentamicin when present together and the effect of pH and of each on antibacterial activity of each other. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1974; 6:54-9.
-
7.
Zinner S.H., Sabath L.D. Casey J.I., et al. Erythromycin plus alkalization in treatment of urinary infections due to gram-negative bacilli. Lancet 1971:1267.
-
8.
Стецюк О.У. Зависимость фармакодинамических параметров антибиотиков от условий определения чувствительности бактериальных возбудителей внебольничных и госпитальных инфекций [диссертация]. Смоленск; 2000.
-
9.
Dekhnich A., Stratchounski L., Stetsiouk O. Comparison of oxacillin-supplemented AGV agar and Mueller–Hinton agar for detection of methicillin-resistance in Staphylococcus aureus. Proceedings of 9th ECCMID; 1999; Berlin, Germany. Abstract P0109.
-
10.
Гивенталь Н.И., Ведьмина Е.А., Богданова Л.Ф., и др. Об унификации методов определения чувствительности микроорганизмов к антибиотикам. Полуколичественная и количественная оценка результатов диффузионного теста. Антибиотики 1980; 6:420-4.
-
11.
Swenson J.M., Hindler J.A., Peterson L.R. Special phenotypic methods for detecting antibacterial resistance. In: Murray P.R., Jo Baron E., Pfaller M.A., Tenover F.C., Yolken R.H., editors. Manual of Clinical Microbiology. 7th ed. Washington, D.C: ASM Press; 1999. p. 1563-78.
-
12.
Михайлова В.С., Гаранина Е.Н., Макарова Н.А. Обеспечение качества в лабораториях клинической микробиологии (бактериологии). Клин лаб диагностика 1995; 4:19-21.
-
13.
European Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. Standard for quality assurance. Part I: Terminology and general principles. ECCLS Document. 1985; 2(1).
-
14.
European Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. Standard for quality assurance. Part II: Internal quality control in microbiology. ECCLS Document. 1985; 2(4).
-
15.
August M.J., Hindler J.A., Huber T.W., et al. Quality control and quality assurance practices in clinical microbiology. Weissfeld A.S., editor. Cumulative Techniques and procedures in Clinical Microbiology 3A. Washington D.C.: American Society For Microbiology; 1990.