scholarly journals Comparison of carbapenem breakpoints in Clinical Laboratory Standard Institute and European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing guidelines on antibiotic susceptibility test reporting of Acinetobacter baumannii

2016 ◽  
Vol 59 (3) ◽  
pp. 429
Author(s):  
Arunava Kali ◽  
PravinM. V. Charles ◽  
Sreenivasan Srirangaraj
Keyword(s):  
Acinetobacter Baumannii ◽  
Antimicrobial Susceptibility ◽  
Antibiotic Susceptibility ◽  
Susceptibility Testing ◽  
Clinical Laboratory ◽  
Susceptibility Test ◽  
Clinical Laboratory Standard Institute ◽  
European Committee ◽  
Clinical Laboratory Standard ◽  
Antibiotic Susceptibility Test

scholarly journals Point-Counterpoint: Differences between the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing and Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute Recommendations for Reporting Antimicrobial Susceptibility Results

2019 ◽  
Vol 57 (9) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gunnar Kahlmeter ◽  
Christian G. Giske ◽  
Thomas J. Kirn ◽  
Susan E. Sharp
Keyword(s):  
Antimicrobial Susceptibility ◽  
Susceptibility Testing ◽  
Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Diffusion Test ◽  
Disk Diffusion Test ◽  
Technical Variability ◽  
European Committee ◽  
Clinical Laboratories ◽  
Antibiotic Susceptibility Test

INTRODUCTION Antibiotic susceptibility test results are among the most important results issued by clinical microbiology laboratories because they routinely guide critical treatment decisions. Interpretations of MIC or disk diffusion test results, such as “susceptible” or “resistant,” are easily understood. Clinical laboratories also need to determine whether and how their reports will reflect more complex situations. Such situations include, first, whether there is need to administer higher or more frequent doses of antibiotic than usual for clinical efficacy; second, whether an antimicrobial is likely to be effective at a body site where it concentrates; and third, whether there is some uncertainty in the test results due to technical variability that cannot be eliminated. Two leading organizations that set standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing, the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) and the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI), have taken different strategies to deal with these challenges. In this Point-Counterpoint, Gunnar Kahlmeter and Christian Giske discuss how EUCAST is addressing these issues, and Thomas Kirn and Susan Sharp discuss the CLSI approach.

Application of a Bioinformatics Method on Detecting of Acinetobacter baumannii Carrying Metallo-β-Lactamases Isolated from Inpatients

2014 ◽  
Vol 881-883 ◽  
pp. 335-338
Author(s):  
Lin Lin Ma ◽  
Ali Huang ◽  
Wei Chu ◽  
Xiao Han Li ◽  
Ming Cheng Li
Keyword(s):  
Acinetobacter Baumannii ◽  
Antimicrobial Susceptibility ◽  
Potential Risk ◽  
Gel Electrophoresis ◽  
Antibiotic Susceptibility ◽  
Screening Method ◽  
Pulsed Field Gel Electrophoresis ◽  
Plasmid Analysis ◽  
Antibiotic Susceptibility Test ◽  
Susceptibility Patterns

The aim of the study was to investigate the prevalence and charateristics of Acinetobacter baumannii producing MBLs isolated from the several wards of the affiliated hospital in Jilin regions. The bioinformatics technology was used to design primers, sequence and blast, in conjunction with antibiotic susceptibility test and MBL screening method. The total of 119 were isolated from three wards and 88 strains (73.9 %) produced MBLs, the number of 31 strains (26.1%) didnt produce MBLs. All MBLs isolates showed same antimicrobial susceptibility patterns. Among Acinetobacter baumannii producing MBLs, 78 strains (88.9%) were positive for blaOXA-23 gene, 10 strains (11.1%) contained blaVIM-2 gene. Plasmid profiles and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis were used to study the relatedness of isolates. All MBLs isolates were closely related by PFGE and plasmid analysis. This study confirmed the potential risk of spreading of Acinetobacter baumannii producing MBLs with inter-and intrahospital clonal transfer of patients.

scholarly journals Molecular characterization and antimicrobial susceptibility of bacterial isolates present in tap water of public toilets

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 472-483 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rajanbir Kaur ◽  
Drishtant Singh ◽  
Anup Kumar Kesavan ◽  
Rajinder Kaur
Keyword(s):  
Antimicrobial Susceptibility ◽  
Water Samples ◽  
Antibiotic Susceptibility ◽  
Tap Water ◽  
Susceptibility Test ◽  
Pseudomonas Sp ◽  
Bacterial Isolates ◽  
The Public ◽  
Antibiotic Susceptibility Test ◽  
Public Toilets

Abstract Background The present study was carried out to investigate the tap water quality of public toilets in Amritsar, Punjab, India. Methods Water samples from the taps of the public toilets were collected in sterile containers and physicochemical and bacteriological analysis was performed using standard methods. Also, genotypic and phenotypic characterization of the bacterial isolates was performed using different biochemical tests and 16S ribosomal RNA analysis. An antibiotic susceptibility test was performed using antibiotics based on their mode of action. A biofilm assay was performed to assess the adhesion potential of the isolates. Results A total of 25 bacterial isolates were identified from the water samples, including Acinetobacter junii, Acinetobacter pittii, Acinetobacter haemolyticus, Bacillus pumilus, Bacillus megaterium, Bacillus marisflavi, Bacillus flexus, Bacillus oceanisediminis, Pseudomonas otitidis, Pseudomonas sp. RR013, Pseudomonas sp. RR021, Pseudomonas sp. RR022, Escherichia coli and Enterobacter cloacae. The results of the antimicrobial susceptibility test revealed that the antibiotics cefodroxil, aztreonam, nitrofurantoin, cefepime, ceftazidime and amoxyclav were found to be mostly ineffective against various isolates. The biofilm assay revealed the weak, moderate and strong biofilm producers among them. Conclusions The tap water in the public toilets was microbially contaminated and needs to be monitored carefully. The antibiotic susceptibility profile showed that of 25 bacterial isolates, 5 were multidrug resistant. Bacterial isolates exhibited strong to weak adhesion potential in the biofilm assay.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document