Evaluation of two commercial methods for the susceptibility testing of Candida species: Vitek 2® and Sensititre YeastOne®
| Autor: | Alexandre Gimenes Marques, Paula Célia Mariko Koga, Jacyr Pasternak, Andre Mario Doi, Marines Dalla Valle Martino, Paulo Petrus de Petrus Crossara, Fabiane Gomes Nunes, Ricardo Andreotti Siqueira |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2018 |
| Předmět: |
0301 basic medicine
biology Candida glabrata business.industry 030106 microbiology Broth microdilution biochemical phenomena metabolism and nutrition bacterial infections and mycoses biology.organism_classification Microbiology Corpus albicans Candida tropicalis 03 medical and health sciences chemistry.chemical_compound Infectious Diseases chemistry Candida krusei Amphotericin B medicine Caspofungin Candida albicans business medicine.drug |
| Zdroj: | Revista Iberoamericana de Micología. 35:83-87 |
| ISSN: | 1130-1406 |
| Popis: | Background An increased incidence of fungal infections caused by Candida species, especially Candida glabrata and Candida krusei, which are less susceptible to azoles, has been observed. Standardized susceptibility testing is essential for clinical management and for monitoring the epidemiology of resistance. Aims We evaluated the performance of two different susceptibility testing commercial methods, Vitek 2® and Sensititre YeastOne®, and compared them with the standard broth microdilution method (CLSI). Methods A total of 80 isolates of several Candida species (Candida albicans, Candida parapsilosis complex, Candida tropicalis, C. glabrata and C. krusei) were selected for this study. Results We analyzed the categorical agreement (CA) between the methods, stratifying the disagreements. The average CA between the methods was 96.3% for Vitek 2® and 84% for Sensititre YeastOne®. No very major errors were observed. Major errors and minor errors were found for all the isolates tested. With the azoles, both Vitek 2® and Sensititre YeastOne® had good and similar performance levels, except for C. tropicalis and C. krusei (Sensititre YeastOne® showed low CA, 56.2%). With the echinocandins, both methods showed good performance for C. albicans, C. parapsilosis and C. tropicalis. However, we observed important discrepancies for C. krusei with caspofungin: Vitek 2® had 100% CA while Sensititre YeastOne® had only 25%. With amphotericin B, both Vitek 2® and Sensititre YeastOne® had good performance with high CA. Conclusions Despite the limited isolates tested, we concluded that both methods have good performance and are reliable for antifungal susceptibility testing. However, caspofungin activity against C. krusei and C. glabrata should be interpreted carefully when using Sensititre YeastOne® because we observed a low CA. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full Text from ScienceDirect