The newly available AST-YS01 Vitek 2 cards were evaluated, and the results were compared with those obtained by the CLSI M27-A2 microdilution reference method. Clinical fungal isolates, including 614 isolates of Candida spp., 10 Cryptococcus neoformans isolates, 1 Geotrichum capitatum isolate, and 2 quality control strains, were tested for their susceptibilities to amphotericin B, fluconazole, and voriconazole using both methods. The majority of fungal isolates were susceptible to all antifungal agents tested: the MIC(90) values determined by the Vitek 2 and CLSI methods were 0.5 and 1 microg/ml, respectively, for amphotericin B; 8 and 16 microg/ml, respectively, for fluconazole; and <0.12 and 0.25 microg/ml, respectively, for voriconazole. Overall there was excellent categorical agreement (CA) between the methods (99.5% for amphotericin B, 92% for fluconazole, 98.2% for voriconazole), but discrepancies were observed within species. The CAs for fluconazole were low for Candida glabrata and Candida krusei when the results of the CLSI method at 48 h were considered. Moreover, the fully automated commercial system did not detect the susceptibility of Cryptococcus neoformans to voriconazole. The Vitek 2 system can be considered a valid support for antifungal susceptibility testing of fungi, but testing of susceptibility to agents not included in the system (e.g., echinocandins and posaconazole) should be performed with other methods.

Comparative evaluation of the Vitek 2 yeast susceptibility test and CLSI broth microdilution method for testing antifungal susceptibility of invasive fungal isolates in Italy : the GISIA3 study / E. Borghi, R. Iatta, R. Sciota, C. Biassoni, T. Cuna, M.T. Montagna, G. Morace. - In: JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY. - ISSN 0095-1137. - 48:9(2010), pp. 3153-3157. [10.1128/JCM.00952-10]

Comparative evaluation of the Vitek 2 yeast susceptibility test and CLSI broth microdilution method for testing antifungal susceptibility of invasive fungal isolates in Italy : the GISIA3 study

E. Borghi
Primo
;
R. Sciota;C. Biassoni;G. Morace
Ultimo
2010

Abstract

The newly available AST-YS01 Vitek 2 cards were evaluated, and the results were compared with those obtained by the CLSI M27-A2 microdilution reference method. Clinical fungal isolates, including 614 isolates of Candida spp., 10 Cryptococcus neoformans isolates, 1 Geotrichum capitatum isolate, and 2 quality control strains, were tested for their susceptibilities to amphotericin B, fluconazole, and voriconazole using both methods. The majority of fungal isolates were susceptible to all antifungal agents tested: the MIC(90) values determined by the Vitek 2 and CLSI methods were 0.5 and 1 microg/ml, respectively, for amphotericin B; 8 and 16 microg/ml, respectively, for fluconazole; and <0.12 and 0.25 microg/ml, respectively, for voriconazole. Overall there was excellent categorical agreement (CA) between the methods (99.5% for amphotericin B, 92% for fluconazole, 98.2% for voriconazole), but discrepancies were observed within species. The CAs for fluconazole were low for Candida glabrata and Candida krusei when the results of the CLSI method at 48 h were considered. Moreover, the fully automated commercial system did not detect the susceptibility of Cryptococcus neoformans to voriconazole. The Vitek 2 system can be considered a valid support for antifungal susceptibility testing of fungi, but testing of susceptibility to agents not included in the system (e.g., echinocandins and posaconazole) should be performed with other methods.
Settore MED/07 - Microbiologia e Microbiologia Clinica
Settore MED/42 - Igiene Generale e Applicata
2010
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
JCM2010.pdf

accesso riservato

Tipologia: Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione 61.93 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
61.93 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2434/146412
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 7
  • Scopus 29
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 28
social impact