Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Martin, E.
Right arrow Articles by Lemeland, J. F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Martin, E.
Right arrow Articles by Lemeland, J. F.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy (1995) 36, 83-91
© 1995 The British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy

research-article

Evaluation of the Epsilometer test (E test) for testing the susceptibility of coagulase-negative staphylococci to teicoplanin

E. Martin, M. Nouvellon, M. Pestel, J. L. Pons and J. F. Lemeland

Laboratoire de Bactériologie, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Charles Nicolle Rouen, France

Received 11 July 1994; returned 4 October 1994; accepted 9 February 1995

The antimicrobial susceptibilities of 118 clinical isolates of coagulase-negative staphylococci to teicoplanin were determined by disc diffusion and the Epsilometer test (E test) and the results were compared with the MICs determined by the agar dilution method of the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS). There was a poor correlation of r = 0.5 between the zone diameters of inhibition and agar dilution MICs and 10 and four of the 11 isolates for which the MICs were ≥ 32 mg/L were misclassified as susceptible by the disc test after applying the interpretative criteria of the NCCLS and the Comité de I'Antibiogramme de la Societe Française de Microbiologie (CASFM), respectively. The E test tended to result in MICs that were lower than those determined by agar dilution and only 66% of MIC were within ± 1 log2 dilution of each other. Only one of 11 resistant strains was detected by the E test and, although there was no false resistance, six resistant strains were misclassified as susceptibleafter applying the criteria of the NCCLS as were four such isolates when the criteria of the CASFM were employed, probablyas a result of using too light an inoculum. Disc diffusion is not a reliable means of determining the susceptibility of coagulase-negative staphylococci but might be replaced by the E-test provided that discrepant results can be resolved by using a denser inoculum.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.