These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Multicenter laboratory evaluation of the MB/BacT Mycobacterium detection system and the BACTEC MGIT 960 system in comparison with the BACTEC 460TB system for susceptibility testing of Mycobacterium tuberculosis.
    Author: Garrigó M, Aragón LM, Alcaide F, Borrell S, Cardeñosa E, Galán JJ, Gonzalez-Martín J, Martin-Casabona N, Moreno C, Salvado M, Coll P.
    Journal: J Clin Microbiol; 2007 Jun; 45(6):1766-70. PubMed ID: 17442793.
    Abstract:
    In this multicenter study, the reliability of two nonradiometric, fully automated systems, the MB/BacT and BACTEC MGIT 960 systems, for testing the susceptibilities of 82 Mycobacterium tuberculosis strains to isoniazid, rifampin, ethambutol, and streptomycin was evaluated in comparison with the radiometric BACTEC 460TB system. The arbitration of discrepant results was done by the reanalysis of the strain, the determination of the MIC, and the molecular characterization of some resistance determinants. The overall level of agreement with BACTEC 460TB results was 96% with the MB/BacT test and 97.2% with the BACTEC MGIT 960 system. With both methods, the level of agreement with BACTEC 460TB results was 96.3% for isoniazid, 98.8% for rifampin, and 98.8% for ethambutol. The level of agreement for streptomycin was 90.2% with MB/BacT and 97.5% with BACTEC MGIT 960. Overall, there were 11 very major errors and 2 major errors with the MB/BacT method and 5 very major errors and 2 major errors with the BACTEC MGIT 960 system. In general, the MB/BacT and BACTEC MGIT 960 systems showed good performance for susceptibility testing with first-line antituberculosis drugs.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]