氟康唑纸片扩散法和浓度梯度法检测酵母菌耐药性的研究  

In vitro susceptibility testing of yeasts: comparison of E-test and disk diffusion method

作　　者：赵心懋[1] 徐英春[1] 王澎[1] 谢秀丽[1] 陈民钧[1] 

机构地区：[1]中国医学科学院北京协和医院检验科,100730

出　　处：《中华检验医学杂志》2005年第9期909-911,共3页Chinese Journal of Laboratory Medicine

摘　　要：目的对比研究酵母菌氟康唑纸片扩散法和浓度梯度法的相关性。方法分别应用纸片扩散法和浓度梯度法检测142株临床分离的酵母菌对氟康唑的敏感性;采用BIOMIC仪自动读取培养板上的抑菌环直径、记录试验结果并对质控数据进行核实;用WHONET5.3软件分析结果,比较两者的相关性。结果两种体外药敏试验方法的一致率可达82.4%,极重要误差率为0.7%,重大误差率为2.8%,次要误差率为14.7%。对于光滑念珠菌两种方法的检测结果有较大差异。结论应用WHONET5.3软件分析得出氟康唑纸片扩散法和浓度梯度法对于检测大多数酵母菌具有非常好的一致性,但对于一部分菌株需要进一步应用常量肉汤稀释法确定其最低抑菌浓度值。Objective To study on the correlation between E-test method and disk diffusion method for determining fluconasole. Methods Fluconazole Disk Diffusion and E-test method procedures were used for determining susceptibility of 142 yeasts isolated from the Peking Union Medical college Hospital. The diameter of inhibition zones of test and reference strain were read by BIOMIC System. WHONET-5 software was used for analyzing the results and evaluating the correlation of in-vitro susceptibility tests. The two susceptibility tests were performed using NCCLS Standard. Results A comparison of the cumulative fluconazole MICs reported by two methods showed a high correlation, accounting for 82. 4% of all the isolates. Very major error was observed （0.7%）, major errors was observed （2. 8% ） and minor errors （ 14. 7% ） were found. The results of candida glabrata have a few difference by two in-vitro susceptibility tests. Conclusions Although Disk diffusion method showed the better agreement with the E-test method for almost yeasts, a few of yeasts isolated need the procedure of NCCLS broth macrodilution for determing MICs.

关 键 词：氟康唑 微生物敏感性试验 酵母菌 浓度梯度法 纸片扩散法 检测结果 耐药性 最低抑菌浓度 试验方法 软件分析 

分 类 号：R446.5[医药卫生—诊断学]