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: [Comparison of two routine techniques for the evaluation of the susceptibility to antibiotics of strict anaerobic bacteria: E test AB Biodisk and ATB ANA Biomerieux].
    Author: Houcke I, Pagniez C, Segard-Roussel V, Dubreuil L.
    Journal: Pathol Biol (Paris); 1994 May; 42(5):454-9. PubMed ID: 7824312.
    Abstract:
    A simple, rapid and reliable method that can be used to test individual isolates in routine is needed. Two systems are now marketed in France. As these two methods have not been studied extensively and never compared, the aim of our study was to evaluate them concurrently. For that 56 anaerobes were collected, including 31 Bacteroides fragilis group strains. The MIC's of 10 antibiotics were determined by the reference agar method. All results were further interpreted in SIR categories. Agreements of the results obtained for each method were assessed comparatively to the reference method results. For E Test and ATB ANA respectively, agreements of results were: 93 and 92.8 p. cent, major discrepancies (R/S): 4.2 and 5.7 p. cent, very major discrepancies (S/R): 3.7 and 1.5 p. cent. Clindamycin was involved in one-third of the discrepancies observed with E test. This study shows that E test and ATB ANA demonstrated interesting alternatives for the susceptibility testing of anaerobes.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]