Comparison of the Performance of Broth Microdilution, Sensititre, and Two Different Automated Systems for Detecting Colistin Resistance Among Multidrug Resistant Acinetobacter baumannii Isolates

dc.contributor.authorAytac, Ozlem
dc.contributor.authorOner, Pinar
dc.contributor.authorSenol, Feray Ferda
dc.contributor.authorAsci-Toraman, Zulal
dc.date.accessioned2026-08-12T17:20:31Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.departmentFırat Üniversitesi
dc.description.abstractObjectives: Although the broth microdilution method (BMD) is recommended in determining colistin resistance, the search for alternative methods continues. We aimed to determine the effectiveness in detecting colistin sensitivity by comparing the liquid microdilution method, which is the gold standard method for colistin susceptibility testing, and the SensititreT microdilution (Thermo Fisher Scientific, MA, USA), PhoenixT 100 (Becton Dickinson, USA), and MicroScan WalkAwayT (Beckman Coulter, USA) automated systems, which are the commercial BMD methods. Methods: For this purpose, 100 multidrug resistant strains of Acinetobacter baumanii were tested for colistin susceptibility. Antibiotic susceptibility results were compared with broth microdilution, SensititreT microdilution (Thermo Fisher Scientific, MA, USA), PhoenixT 100 (Becton Dickinson, USA), and MicroScan WalkawayT (Beckman Coulter, USA). Results: According to the criteria set by International Organization of Standardization (ISO), categorical agreement, major error, and very large error rates were not found in acceptable performance when the Phoenix and Sensitizer microdilution methods were compared with the gold standard method BMD. In addition, we determined that the categorical agreement (97%), major error (1%), and very large error (2%) rates of the MicroScan Walkaway method were acceptable. Conclusion: Since BMD is not a practical method, its use is not preferred. Simple and accurate phenotypic detection methods to determine colistin resistance in routine microbiology laboratories have not yet been defined. Although different results were obtained in different studies, MicroScan Walkaway provided the necessary criteria for the method acceptance in our study.
dc.identifier.doi10.36519/kd.2022.4092
dc.identifier.endpage163
dc.identifier.issn1301-143X
dc.identifier.issn1309-1484
dc.identifier.issue3
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0001-5202-8564
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0002-3305-6284
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0001-9592-5986
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0003-4705-5757
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85139567821
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ4
dc.identifier.startpage159
dc.identifier.trdizinid1171393
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.36519/kd.2022.4092
dc.identifier.urihttps://search.trdizin.gov.tr/tr/yayin/detay/1171393
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11508/53594
dc.identifier.volume35
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000979457900007
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ3
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.indekslendigikaynakTR-Dizin
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherDoc Design Informatics Co Ltd
dc.relation.ispartofKlimik Journal
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.snmzKA_WoS_20260511
dc.subjectcolistin
dc.subjectAcinetobacter baumannii
dc.subjectbroth microdilution
dc.subjectsensititre
dc.subjectautomated systems
dc.titleComparison of the Performance of Broth Microdilution, Sensititre, and Two Different Automated Systems for Detecting Colistin Resistance Among Multidrug Resistant Acinetobacter baumannii Isolates
dc.title.alternativeKlinik Örneklerden İzole Edilen Çoklu Dirençli Acinetobacter baumannii İzolatlarının Kolistin Direncinin Sıvı Mikrodilüsyon, Sensititre ve İki Farklı Otomatize Sistem ile Karşılaştırılması
dc.typeArticle

Dosyalar