Avaliação das metodologias M.I.C.E.®, Etest® e microdiluição em caldo para determinação da CIM em isolados clínicos

INTRODUCTION: The Oxoid® M.I.C.EvaluatorTM methodology (M.I.C.E., Thermo Fisher Scientific, Basingstoke, UK), recently released into the market, represents a rapid alternative to antimicrobial susceptibility testing. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of M.I.C.E. methodology in relation to broth microdilution (reference test) and Etest® (BioMerieux, Marcy l'Etoile, France). Material and method: A total of 160 bacterial isolates were collected comprising the following species: P. aeruginosa (20), Acinetobacter spp. (20), K. pneumoniae (20), E. coli (20), S. aureus (20), coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (20), E. faecalis (20) and E. faecium (20). Following Clinical Laboratory Standands Institute (CLSI) standards (2009) and the manufacturers' recommendations, antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed using broth microdilution method, Etest and M.I.C.E. The results were interpreted according to the criteria established by CLSI and compared through regression analysis. RESULTS: All antimicrobial combinations vs. bacterial species were evaluated and M.I.C.E. methodology yielded good results with general correlation (MIC variation ± 1-log2) > 90%, except for cefotaxime (85%) and vancomycin (76.3%) when compared with the reference method. The M.I.C.E. results compared to Etest showed general correlation (> 96%), except for amoxicillin/clavulanic acid (67.5%) combination. CONCLUSION: AST results obtained from M.I.C.E. methodology showed a good correlation with those from broth microdilution and Etest, which corroborates its time effectiveness in the determination of MIC. However, the combination of amoxicillin/clavulanic acid requires further attention.