Comment on: Performance of the Oxoid M.I.C.EvaluatorTM Strips compared with the Etest(R) assay and BSAC agar dilution

Carvalhaes, Cecília G; Campana, Eloiza Helena; Barbosa, Paula P.; Paula, Ana M. de; Gales, Ana Cristina

doi:10.1093/jac/dkr065

Cited by 2 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This finding is corroborated by previous studies performed under CLSI recommendations independent of methodology tested, BMD or agar dilution [4], [5]. In general, vancomycin MICs determined by M.I.C.E.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

“…with those obtained by CLSI broth microdilution (BMD) and observed that the vancomycin MICs values determined by M.I.C.E. were higher than those obtained by BMD [4]. A similar finding was latter reported by Rennie et al .…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 87%

“…In general, vancomycin MICs determined by M.I.C.E. showed a 1-log 2 dilution higher than those of Etest [4], [5]. It is important to notice that vancomycin CLSI susceptibility breakpoints for S. aureus (≤2 µg/mL) are 1-log 2 dilution lower than those of CoNS (≤4 µg/mL).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…methodology have been published to date [4], [5], [8]–[10]. Only three of them evaluated Staphylococcus spp., as shown in Table 2.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Comparison of M.I.C.E. and Etest with CLSI Agar Dilution for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing against Oxacillin-Resistant Staphylococcus spp

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveThe main objective of this study was to comparatively evaluate the performance of M.I.C.E. and Etest methodologies to that of agar dilution for determining the antimicrobial susceptibility profile of oxacillin-resistant Staphylococcus spp.MethodsA total of 100 oxacillin-resistant Staphylococcus spp. isolates were collected from hospitalized patients at a teaching hospital. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing for vancomycin, teicoplanin and linezolid was performed using the reference CLSI agar dilution method (2009), Etest and M.I.C.E. methodologies. The MIC values were interpreted according to CLSI susceptibility breakpoints and compared by regression analysis.ResultsIn general, the essential agreement (±1-log2) between M.I.C.E. and CLSI agar dilution was 93.0%, 84.0% and 77.0% for linezolid, teicoplanin and vancomycin, respectively. Essential agreement rates between M.I.C.E. and Etest were excellent (>90.0%) for all antibiotics tested. Both strips (M.I.C.E. and Etest) yielded two very major errors for linezolid. Unacceptable minor rates were observed for teicoplanin against CoNS and for vancomycin against S. aureus.ConclusionsAccording to our results, linezolid and teicoplanin MICs against all staphylococci and S. aureus, respectively, were more accurately predicted by M.I.C.E. strips. However, the Etest showed better performance than M.I.C.E. for predicting vancomycin MICs against all staphylococci. Thus, microbiologists must be aware of the different performance of commercially available gradient strips against staphylococci.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…methodology have been published to date [4], [5], [8]–[10]. Only three of them evaluated Staphylococcus spp., as shown in Table 2.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparison of M.I.C.E. and Etest with CLSI Agar Dilution for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing against Oxacillin-Resistant Staphylococcus spp

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The M.I.C. Evaluator device has been compared to the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy (BSAC) method, with observations similar to those in the current study (1,8). Other collections of bacterial species, including anaerobes and fastidious bacteria, are reported in a companion publication (11).…”

mentioning

confidence: 72%

First Comprehensive Evaluation of the M.I.C. Evaluator Device Compared to Etest and CLSI Broth Microdilution for MIC Testing of Aerobic Gram-Positive and Gram-Negative Bacterial Species

Rennie¹,

Turnbull²,

Brosnikoff³

et al. 2012

J Clin Microbiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comment on: Performance of the Oxoid M.I.C.EvaluatorTM Strips compared with the Etest(R) assay and BSAC agar dilution

Cited by 2 publications

References 3 publications

Comparison of M.I.C.E. and Etest with CLSI Agar Dilution for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing against Oxacillin-Resistant Staphylococcus spp

Comparison of M.I.C.E. and Etest with CLSI Agar Dilution for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing against Oxacillin-Resistant Staphylococcus spp

First Comprehensive Evaluation of the M.I.C. Evaluator Device Compared to Etest and CLSI Broth Microdilution for MIC Testing of Aerobic Gram-Positive and Gram-Negative Bacterial Species

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About