Correlation of Etest and Neo-Sensitabs diffusion assays on Mueller-Hinton-methylene blue agar with broth microdilution reference method (CLSI-M27-A2) for testing susceptibilities of Cryptococcus neoformans to amphotericin B and fluconazole

6Citations
Citations of this article
21Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Cryptococcus neoformans causes disseminated infection in 78% of HIV positive patients admitted to Hospital F. J. Muiz in Buenos Aires. Meningoencephalitis is the most frequent clinical manifestation and is one of the main causes of death in those patients with AIDS. The standard treatment for this mycosis consists of amphotericin B followed by fluconazole until two successive cultures of CFS are negative. Although resistance to these drugs is infrequent, minimal inhibitory concentrations (MIC) of some antifungals can be high. Since it is important to know the susceptibility levels of this fungus to the antifungal drugs usually employed in our institution, we analyzed the susceptibility test results of C. neoformans with two diffusion methods (Etest and NeoSensitabs tablets) employing Mueller-Hinton agar with 2% glucose and 0.5 μg/ml methylene blue. These results were compared with MICs obtained through the use of the broth microdilution reference method (CLSI). Results showed good agreement with the reference method, with no very major errors and only two major errors for fluconazole using NeoSensitabs tablets. For all the above mentioned, we confirm the usefulness of Mueller-Hinton agar to evaluate C. neoformans susceptibility to amphotericin B and fluconazole with these two agar diffusion methods. © 2010 ISHAM.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Ochiuzzi, M. E., Santiso, G. M., & Arechavala, A. I. (2010). Correlation of Etest and Neo-Sensitabs diffusion assays on Mueller-Hinton-methylene blue agar with broth microdilution reference method (CLSI-M27-A2) for testing susceptibilities of Cryptococcus neoformans to amphotericin B and fluconazole. Medical Mycology, 48(6), 893–896. https://doi.org/10.3109/13693781003733750

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free