title: Inaccuracy of the disk diffusion method compared with the agar dilution method for susceptibility testing of Campylobacter spp.
abstract: The agar dilution method has been standardized by the CLSI for the susceptibility testing of Campylobacter species, and according to these standards, the disk diffusion method should be used only in screening for macrolide and ciprofloxacin resistance. Nevertheless, the disk diffusion test is currently widely used, since it is easy to perform in clinical microbiology laboratories. In this study, the disk diffusion method was compared to the agar dilution method by analyzing the in vitro activities of seven antimicrobial agents against 174 Campylobacter strains collected in Finland between 2003 and 2008. Recommendations of the CLSI were followed using Mueller-Hinton agar plates with 5% of sheep blood. For each strain, the disk diffusion tests were performed two to four times. Of the 33 erythromycin-resistant strains (MIC, ≥16 μg/ml), 24 (73%) constantly showed a 6-mm erythromycin inhibition zone (i.e., no inhibition), while for seven strains the inhibition zone varied from 6 to 44 mm in repeated measurements. Among the 141 erythromycin-susceptible strains (MIC, <16 μg/ml), erythromycin inhibition zones varied between 6 and 61 mm. Of the 87 ciprofloxacin-resistant strains, 47 (54%) showed 6-mm inhibition zones, while 40 strains showed inhibition zones between 6 and 60 mm. Significant differences between the repetitions were observed in the disk diffusion for all antimicrobial agents and all strains except for the macrolide-resistant strains regarding the macrolides. For 17 (10%) strains, the variation in repeated measurements was substantial. These results show that the disk diffusion method may not be a reliable tool for the susceptibility testing of Campylobacter spp. Further studies are needed to assess whether the disk diffusion test could be improved or whether all susceptibilities of campylobacters should be tested using an MIC-based method.
authors.affiliation: Antimicrobial Resistance Unit, National Institute for Health and Welfare (THL), Turku and Helsinki, Finland. mipleht@utu.fi
authors.forename: Mirva
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Lehtopolku
authors.forename: Pirkko
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Kotilainen
authors.forename: Pauli
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Puukka
authors.forename: Ulla-Maija
authors.initials: UM
authors.lastname: Nakari
authors.forename: Anja
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Siitonen
authors.forename: Erkki
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Eerola
authors.forename: Pentti
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Huovinen
authors.forename: Antti J
authors.initials: AJ
authors.lastname: Hakanen
mesh_terms: D000900:Anti-Bacterial Agents / Q000494:pharmacology*; D002167:Campylobacter / Q000187:drug effects* / Q000302:isolation & purification; D005387:Finland; D006801:Humans; D008826:Microbial Sensitivity Tests / Q000379:methods*; D015203:Reproducibility of Results
chemical_list: D000900:Anti-Bacterial Agents
references.citation: Vet Res. 2001 May-Aug;32(3-4):311-21
references.pmid: 11432422
references.citation: Clin Infect Dis. 2001 Apr 15;32(8):1201-6
references.pmid: 11283810
references.citation: Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2007 Apr;51(4):1524-6
references.pmid: 17261628
references.citation: Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2008 Jul;27(7):513-8
references.pmid: 18317822
references.citation: Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2010 Mar;54(3):1232-6
references.pmid: 20038624
references.citation: Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2006 Mar;50(3):1086-8
references.pmid: 16495275
references.citation: Can J Vet Res. 2008;72(2):168-74
references.pmid: 18505206
references.citation: J Antimicrob Chemother. 2001 Jul;48 Suppl 1:77-80
references.pmid: 11420340
references.citation: Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2008 Dec;52(12):4475-7
references.pmid: 18838597
references.citation: Clin Microbiol Infect. 2010 Jan;16(1):51-6
references.pmid: 19438640
references.citation: J Microbiol Methods. 2009 Nov;79(2):238-41
references.pmid: 19793541
references.citation: Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2009 Oct;65(2):168-74
references.pmid: 19748428
references.citation: Emerg Infect Dis. 2002 Mar;8(3):237-44
references.pmid: 11927019
references.citation: J Antimicrob Chemother. 2003 Dec;52(6):1035-9
references.pmid: 14613954