Use of Potassium Tellurite for Rapid-Drug Susceptibility Testing of Mycobacterium avium Complex

The reliability of the Mycobacteria Growth Indicator Tube (MGIT [BBL]) for rapid drug susceptibility testing of Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) isolates was evaluated. MICs of amikacin, clarithromycin, clofazimine, ethambutol, and rifabutin were determined by the MGIT system for 16 MAC strains. The results were compared with those obtained by the BACTEC broth macrodilution method. The turnaround times were 6 to 8 days (median, 7 days) for the MGIT and 5 to 7 days (median, 6 days) for the BACTEC system. Agreements with BACTEC system-determined MICs, within ±1 log2 dilution, were 100, 100, 88, 63, and 44% for amikacin, clofazimine, rifabutin, clarithromycin, and ethambutol, respectively. Within ±2 log2 dilutions, agreement with BACTEC system-determined MICs increased to 100% for all the tested drugs. In addition, if MGIT-determined MICs were evaluated according to the thresholds adopted for the interpretation of BACTEC system-determined ones, ethambutol was the only drug for which susceptible strains were frequently misclassified as resistant. It is concluded that the MGIT system is a promising, nonradiometric alternative to the BACTEC method for rapid susceptibility testing of MAC isolates; however, additional studies are required to confirm our results and to determine the optimal criteria for the interpretation of ethambutol MICs.

Download Full-text

Pharmacokinetics And Drug Susceptibility Testing Imply Limited Activity Of Current Regimens For Mycobacterium Avium Complex Disease

10.1164/ajrccm-conference.2011.183.1_meetingabstracts.a2404 ◽

2011 ◽

Author(s):

Jakko van Ingen ◽

Adrah Levin ◽

Sarah Elizabeth Totten ◽

Leonid B. Heifets ◽

Charles Peloquin ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Mycobacterium Avium ◽

Mycobacterium Avium Complex ◽

Complex Disease ◽

Susceptibility Testing ◽

Drug Susceptibility ◽

Drug Susceptibility Testing ◽

Mycobacterium Avium Complex Disease

Download Full-text

Single and double drug susceptibility testing of Mycobacterium avium complex and mycobacteria other than the tubercle (MOTT) bacilli by a micro-dilution broth minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) method

Tubercle and Lung Disease ◽

10.1016/0962-8479(94)90134-1 ◽

1994 ◽

Vol 75 (4) ◽

pp. 286-290 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

M.A.S. Telles ◽

M.D. Yates

Keyword(s):

Minimum Inhibitory Concentration ◽

Mycobacterium Avium ◽

Mycobacterium Avium Complex ◽

Susceptibility Testing ◽

Inhibitory Concentration ◽

Drug Susceptibility ◽

Drug Susceptibility Testing

Download Full-text

Quantitative cultures and drug susceptibility testing of Mycobacterium avium clinical isolates before and during the antimicrobial therapy

Research in Microbiology ◽

10.1016/0923-2508(94)90017-5 ◽

1994 ◽

Vol 145 (3) ◽

pp. 188-196 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

L.B. Heifets

Keyword(s):

Mycobacterium Avium ◽

Antimicrobial Therapy ◽

Susceptibility Testing ◽

Drug Susceptibility ◽

Drug Susceptibility Testing ◽

Clinical Isolates

Download Full-text

Drug susceptibility testing of Mycobacterium Avium subsp. Avium isolates from naturally infected domestic pigeons to avian tuberculosis

International Journal of Mycobacteriology ◽

10.1016/j.ijmyco.2016.09.018 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 5 ◽

pp. S217-S218 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Kaveh Parvandar ◽

Mansour Mayahi ◽

Nader Mosavari ◽

Reza Aref Pajoohi

Keyword(s):

Mycobacterium Avium ◽

Susceptibility Testing ◽

Drug Susceptibility ◽

Drug Susceptibility Testing ◽

Mycobacterium Avium Subsp ◽

Domestic Pigeons

Download Full-text

Treatment of Mycobacterium avium Complex (MAC)

Seminars in Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine ◽

10.1055/s-0038-1660472 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 39 (03) ◽

pp. 351-361 ◽

Cited By ~ 14

Author(s):

David Griffith

Keyword(s):

Lung Disease ◽

Mycobacterium Avium ◽

Mycobacterium Avium Complex ◽

The United States ◽

Drug Susceptibility ◽

Resistance Mechanisms ◽

Drug Susceptibility Testing ◽

Respiratory Pathogen ◽

Radiographic Changes

Abstract Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) is the most commonly isolated nontuberculous mycobacterial respiratory pathogen worldwide. MAC lung disease is manifested either by fibrocavitary radiographic changes similar to pulmonary tuberculosis or by bronchiectasis with nodular and reticulonodular radiographic changes. This latter form of MAC lung disease, termed “nodular bronchiectatic (NB) MAC lung disease” is the most common form of MAC lung disease in the United States. Treatment at the time of diagnosis is always indicated for fibrocavitary MAC lung disease because it is always progressive and associated with increased morbidity and mortality compared with NB MAC lung disease. In contrast, the NB form of MAC lung disease is more indolent and frequently does not require antimycobacterial therapy. For patients with NB MAC lung disease, the priorities are typically to treat the underlying bronchiectasis and determine the course and impact of the MAC infection over time. Guidelines-based MAC therapy with multidrug regimens including macrolides is usually effective, but far from as predictably effective and durable as therapy for tuberculosis. It is imperative that clinicians are familiar with MAC drug resistance mechanisms and the pitfalls of inappropriate dependence on in vitro drug susceptibility testing which can predispose patients to the development of macrolide resistance with its attendant high mortality. It is now more than 20 years since the emergence of macrolides for MAC therapy with no new comparably effective agents introduced in that time, although one new inhaled amikacin therapy under study offers promise.

Download Full-text