In Vitro Activity of Antifungal Drugs Against Trichophyton rubrum and Trichophyton mentagrophytes spp. by E-Test Method and Non-supplemented Mueller-Hinton Agar Plates.
Antifungal resistance
Antifungal susceptibility
Dermatophytosis
Fluconazole
Terbinafine
Journal
Mycopathologia
ISSN: 1573-0832
Titre abrégé: Mycopathologia
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 7505689
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2019
Aug 2019
Historique:
received:
05
03
2019
accepted:
02
07
2019
pubmed:
13
7
2019
medline:
7
3
2020
entrez:
13
7
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Trichophyton rubrum and Trichophyton mentagrophytes spp. are two of the most frequently isolated dermatophytes causing dermatophytosis worldwide. Since the incidence of resistance to antifungal agents is increasing, antifungal susceptibility tests are needed to successfully treat dermatophytoses. Most of the methods currently available are complicated, time-consuming and lack of reference procedures. The aim of this work was to establish a simple protocol to test the susceptibility of dermatophytes isolated from clinical samples against five antifungal drugs using E-test and disk diffusion methods. We used the E-test on non-supplemented Mueller-Hinton agar plates to determine the minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of fluconazole, itraconazole, voriconazole and amphotericin B, and disk diffusion method to determine the interpretive MIC of terbinafine. Fifty dermatophytes-10 T. rubrum and 40 T. mentagrophytes spp.-were assessed after only 96 h of colony growth. Terbinafine was the most active antifungal agent with an inhibition diameter greater than 70 mm (sensitivity > 20 mm), followed by voriconazole, itraconazole and amphotericin B with MICs ranging from 0.032 to 0.38 µg/mL, from 0.006 to 0.125 µg/mL and from 0.5 to 1.5 µg/mL, respectively. All isolates were resistant to fluconazole. Collectively, the less laborious E-test and disk diffusion method were shown to be suitable and reliable to determine antifungal sensitivity of dermatophytes. This simple standard protocol could be employed in the routine of clinical laboratories.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31297668
doi: 10.1007/s11046-019-00360-9
pii: 10.1007/s11046-019-00360-9
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antifungal Agents
0
Culture Media
0
Agar
9002-18-0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
517-523Références
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2003 Jan;47(1):82-6
pubmed: 12499173
Med Mycol. 2003 Apr;41(2):125-30
pubmed: 12964844
J Clin Microbiol. 2004 Jul;42(7):2977-9
pubmed: 15243047
Rev Iberoam Micol. 2005 Jun;22(2):110-3
pubmed: 16107170
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2007 Mar;57(3):273-6
pubmed: 17141455
Arch Dermatol Res. 2007 May;299(2):107-9
pubmed: 17333224
J Med Microbiol. 2007 Apr;56(Pt 4):514-8
pubmed: 17374893
Med Mycol. 2008 Mar;46(2):119-23
pubmed: 18324490
Mycoses. 2008 Sep;51 Suppl 4:2-15
pubmed: 18783559
BMC Res Notes. 2009 Apr 18;2:60
pubmed: 19374765
Clin Infect Dis. 2009 Dec 1;49(11):1749-55
pubmed: 19857164
Med Mycol. 2009 Nov;47(7):753-8
pubmed: 19888808
Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2012 Apr;25(2):126-34
pubmed: 22248981
Med Mycol. 2013 Jan;51(1):17-24
pubmed: 22574631
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2013 Nov;57(11):5767-70
pubmed: 23979756
Eurasian J Med. 2014 Feb;46(1):26-31
pubmed: 25610290
J Clin Microbiol. 2015 Oct;53(10):3176-81
pubmed: 26202113
Indian J Med Microbiol. 2015 Oct-Dec;33(4):533-7
pubmed: 26470960
Mycopathologia. 2017 Feb;182(1-2):183-192
pubmed: 27734185
Mycopathologia. 2017 Feb;182(1-2):77-86
pubmed: 27783316
Mycopathologia. 2017 Feb;182(1-2):5-31
pubmed: 27783317
J Clin Microbiol. 2017 Feb;55(2):369-379
pubmed: 27807151
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2017 Jun 27;61(7):
pubmed: 28416557
Mycoses. 2018 Jul;61(7):477-484
pubmed: 29577447
Indian Dermatol Online J. 2018 Mar-Apr;9(2):120-122
pubmed: 29644200
Lett Appl Microbiol. 2018 Aug;67(2):136-143
pubmed: 29679385
J Fungi (Basel). 2019 Feb 22;5(1):null
pubmed: 30813287