Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
A total of 270 viridans group streptococci (VS) isolated from healthy children, identified to the species level, were tested for their susceptibilities to penicillin, imipenem, erythromycin, and vancomycin. A total of 270 isolates and 1,080 organism-antibiotic combinations were evaluated. The overall susceptibility rates of all isolates obtained by the Etest (ET) versus agar dilution (AD) were 60.4% versus 61.8% for penicillin, 63.8% versus 63.9% for erythromycin, 90.6% versus 96% for vancomycin, and 99.1% versus 96.0% for imipenem, respectively. Major discrepancies occurred in the testing of the susceptibility of Streptococcus mutans to vancomycin, with 59.5% (ET) versus 100% (AD), followed by S. salivarius, with 84.1% versus 100%; S. oralis, with 82.1% versus 96.4%; and S. mitis, with 90% versus 100%, respectively. There were also differences in the rates of susceptibility of S. mutans, 66.5% (ET) versus 85.1% (AD), and S. intermedius, 82.9% versus 72.1%, respectively, to penicillin. General agreement between the results of ET and AD was obtained for 973 organism-antibiotic combinations out of 1,080 antibiotic combinations, i.e., 90.1%. Very major errors were found for 6.8% of isolates, and major errors were found for 3.2% of isolates; the minor errors were negligible. Agreement between the results of the two methods was 98.7% for penicillin, 94.6% for vancomycin, 96.9% for imipenem, and 99.9% for erythromycin. The highest rate of very major errors was for vancomycin, at 5.4%. The ET appears to be as efficient as AD for susceptibility testing of VS, except for vancomycin, where very major errors in the results were relatively high.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mokaddas et al. (2007) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: