Comparison of Conventional Methods and Automated Systems for Determining Antibiotic Susceptibility of Bacteria Isolated from Urine Culture

Authors

  • Mücahide Esra Koçoğlu Istanbul Medeniyet University Medical Faculty, Department Of Medical Microbiyology
  • İsmail Davarci Erzincan University Mengücek Gazi Educating Researching Hospital, Clinic Of Medical Microbiyology, Erzincan
  • Rabia Güney Istanbul Medeniyet University Medical Faculty, Department Of Medical Microbiyology
  • Melike Taşçilar Istanbul Medeniyet University Medical Faculty, Department Of Medical Microbiyology
  • Ferhat Zengi̇n Istanbul Medeniyet University Medical Faculty, Departmet Of Medical Microbiyology
  • Mustafa Samasti Istanbul Medeniyet University Medical Faculty, Department Of Medical Microbiyology

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3329/bjms.v18i3.41620

Keywords:

Bacterial Susceptibility Tests; Disk Diffusion Antimicrobial Tests; Gram-Positive Bacteria; Enterobacteriaceae

Abstract

Objective: The aim of our study was to compare the results obtained from different methods, which are used to determine the susceptibility to antimicrobials, and to determine the agreement between them.

Materials and Methods: A total of 397 strains consisting of 329 gram negative and 68 gram positive bacteria that were isolated from urine samples and identification and antibiogram of which were performed by automated systems, were included in the study. The results obtained from broth microdilution, E test, VITEK and disk diffusion were compared.

Results: Our antimicrobial susceptibility test results in gram negative bacteria showed a categorical agreement of 93.3% with a very major error rate of 1.5 in disk diffusion test, while a categorical agreement of 90% with a very major error rate of 2.2% in Vitek 2 test. The agreement for E test was 95.3% with a very major error rate of 1.1. In the antimicrobial susceptibility test of gram positive bacteria, the rate of agreement for disk diffusion, E test and Vitek 2 was 97.2%, 98.4% and 95.4% respectively. Very major error rate was found % 1.5 ve % 2.6 in disk diffusion and Vitek 2, respectively, while no very major error was found in E test.

Conclusions: In conclusion, our data suggest that disk diffusion test, Vitek 2 system and E test test are accurate and acceptable for antibiotic susceptibility tests of gram positive bacteria. The agreement rate of BMD and E test methods was found above 90% for all antibiotics, and it was reached a conclusion that the susceptibility results of gram negative bacteria for ceftriaxone and nitrofurantoin obtained from VITEK; the susceptibility results of disk diffusion test for ceftriaxone and ciprofloxacin should be confirmed by a more reliable method.

Bangladesh Journal of Medical Science Vol.18(3) 2019 p.519-526

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Abstract
4
PDF
4

Downloads

Published

2019-05-30

How to Cite

Koçoğlu, M. E., Davarci, İsmail, Güney, R., Taşçilar, M., Zengi̇n F., & Samasti, M. (2019). Comparison of Conventional Methods and Automated Systems for Determining Antibiotic Susceptibility of Bacteria Isolated from Urine Culture. Bangladesh Journal of Medical Science, 18(3), 519–526. https://doi.org/10.3329/bjms.v18i3.41620

Issue

Vol. 18 No. 3 (2019)

Section

Original Articles

License

Authors who publish in the Bangladesh Journal of Medical Science agree to the following terms that:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant Bangladesh Journal of Medical Science the right of first publication of the work.

  2. Creative Commons Licence
    Articles in Bangladesh Journal of Medical Science are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License CC BY-4.0.This license permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
  3. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  4. Authors are permitted to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as greater citation of published work.