Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVES: There are different methodological recommendations for in vitro testing of the co-amoxiclav combination. Performance of co-amoxiclav MIC testing for Escherichia coli by the standard ISO microdilution method (ISO 20776-1) was compared using EUCAST (fixed 2 mg/L clavulanate concentration) and CLSI (2 : 1 ratio) interpretive criteria. METHODS: MICs were determined by broth microdilution using a 2 : 1 ratio and fixed clavulanate concentrations (2 and 4 mg/L) for 160 clinical E. coli isolates with characterized resistance mechanisms. Essential agreements, categorical agreements and relative errors were determined. RESULTS: For all isolates, essential agreement between microdilution using 2 mg/L clavulanate and a 2 : 1 ratio was 25.6%. For ESBL-producing isolates, considering EUCAST breakpoints, 55% of isolates tested with 2 mg/L clavulanate were classified as resistant; conversely, 95% of isolates tested with 4 mg/L clavulanate were susceptible. When using CLSI breakpoints and a 2 : 1 ratio, 90% of isolates were susceptible and 10% were intermediate. CONCLUSIONS: Variation in the clavulanate concentration gave different susceptibility testing results, particularly among ESBL-producing E. coli isolates. The in vitro concentration of clavulanate that better correlates with clinical outcome is still under debate and should be established.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Diez‐Aguilar et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: