EUCAST和CLSI微量稀释法检测曲霉体外药物敏感试验差异比较  

Comparison of susceptibility testing by EUCAST and CLSI broth microdilution methods against Aspergillus isolates

作　　者：张明[1] 陈菲[1] 孙文逵[1] 吴婷[1] 颜文杰[1] 苏欣[1] 施毅[1] 

机构地区：[1]南京大学医学院临床学院(南京军区南京总医院)呼吸与危重症医学科,南京210002

出　　处：《中国感染与化疗杂志》2014年第4期338-343,共6页Chinese Journal of Infection and Chemotherapy

基　　金：国家自然科学基金面上项目(81270064)

摘　　要：目的比较欧洲抗菌药物敏感试验委员会（European Committeeon Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing，EUCAST）和美国临床实验室标准化协会（Clinicaland Laboratory Standards Institute，CLSI）微量稀释法检测曲霉体外药物敏感性的差异。方法分别用EUCAST方法和CLSI方法检测116株曲霉对两性霉素B、伏立康唑、伊曲康唑、卡？白芬净和米卡芬净的敏感性，比较两种方法的基本符合率、药敏符合率、极重大误差率和重大误差率。结果EUCAST方法和CLSI方法对116株曲霉药敏检测的基本符合率为96．3％～100％。两方法检测烟曲霉对伏立康唑的药敏符合率98．8％，重大误差为1．2％，极重大误差率为0。烟曲霉和黑曲霉对两性霉素B以及烟曲霉和黄曲霉对伊曲康唑的药敏符合率均为100％，重大误差率和极重大误差率均为0。结论EUCAST方法和CLSI方法对检测曲霉体外药物敏感性具有良好的一致性。Objective To compare the results of susceptibility testing by European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing （EUCAST） and Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute （CLSI） broth microdilution methods against Aspergillus isolates. Methods The susceptibilities of 116 Aspergillus isolates were determined for amphoteriein B, vorieonazole, itraconazole, easpofungin and micafungin according to EUCAST （E. DEF 9. 1 ） and CLSI （M38-A2） methods. The essential agreement （EA）, categorical agreement （CA）, very major errors （VME） and major errors （ME） of the two methods were compared. Results The EA was 96.3%-100% between the two methods. The CA , ME, and VME were 98.8% , 0-1. 2% and 0 respectively for the susceptibility of Aspergillus fumigatus to voriconazole. The CA, ME and VME was 100%, 0 and 0 respectively for the susceptibility of Aspergillus furnigatus and Aspergillus niger to amphoteriein B, or the susceptibility of Aspergillus furnigatus and Aspergillus flavus to itraeonazole. Conelusions The results of susceptibility testing by EUCAST and CLSI broth microdilution methods are well consistent against Aspergillus isolates.

关 键 词：曲霉 EUCAST CLSI 最低抑菌浓度 最低有效浓度 

分 类 号：R379[医药卫生—病原生物学]