Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11283051›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2001

Evaluation of Etest for direct antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts in positive blood cultures.

H C Chang, J J Chang, S H Chan, A H Huang, T L Wu, M C Lin, T C Chang

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Rapid antifungal susceptibility testing from positive blood cultures using direct gradient diffusion: a prospective study.Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2026
    Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Analysis of Antifungal Drug Resistance AmongInfection and drug resistance · 2025
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

H C ChangInstitute of Medical Engineering, College of Medicine, Tainan 701, Taiwan, Republic of China.
J J Chang
S H Chan
A H Huang
T L Wu
M C Lin
T C Chang

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The performance of the Etest (AB BIODISK, Solna, Sweden) for direct antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts in positive blood cultures was compared with that of the macrodilution method for determining the MICs of five antifungal agents. Culture broths with blood from bottles positive for yeasts were inoculated directly onto plates for susceptibility testing with the Etest, and the MICs were read after 24 and 48 h of incubation. A total of 141 positive blood cultures (72 cultures of Candida albicans, 31 of Candida tropicalis, 14 of Candida glabrata, 11 of Candida parapsilosis, 3 of Candida krusei, and 3 of Cryptococcus neoformans, 4 miscellaneous yeast species, and 3 mixed cultures) were tested, and the rates of MIC agreement (+/-1 log(2) dilution) between the direct Etest (at 24 and 48 h, respectively) and macrodilution methods were as follows: amphotericin B, 81.8 and 93.5%; flucytosine, 84.8 and 87.7%; fluconazole, 89.4 and 85.5%; itraconazole, 69.7 and 63.8%; ketoconazole, 87.9 and 79.0%. By a large-sample t test, the difference in log(2) dilution between the direct Etest and the macrodilution method was found to be small (P < 0.05). The lone exceptions were ketoconazole at 48 h of incubation and itraconazole at both 24 and 48 h of incubation (P > 0.05). By Tukey's multiple comparisons, the difference between the direct Etest (48 h) and reference methods among different species was found to be less than 1 log(2) dilution. When the MICs were translated into interpretive susceptibility, the minor errors caused by the direct Etest (at 24 and 48 h, respectively) were as follows: flucytosine, 2.3 and 1.4%; fluconazole, 3.0 and 3.6%; itraconazole, 21.2 and 21.3%. Itraconazole also produced an additional 3.0 and 3.6% major errors as determined by the direct Etest at 24 and 48 h, respectively. It was concluded that, except for itraconazole, the Etest method was feasible for direct susceptibility testing of blood cultures positive for yeasts. The method is simple, and the results could be read between 24 and 48 h after direct inoculation, whenever the inhibition zones were discernible.

Indexed as

Antifungal AgentsBloodCandidaCryptococcus neoformansCulture MediaHumansMicrobial Sensitivity TestsMycosesTrichosporonYeastsAntifungal AgentsCulture Media

Identifiers

PMID11283051
PMCPMC87934

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.