CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 442Bacterial Identification and Susceptibility TestingAntibiotic Resistance in BacteriaAntibiotic Use and Resistance

Current and Emerging Methods of Antibiotic Susceptibility Testing

Open access
Khan, Zeeshan A., Siddiqui, Mohd F., Park, Seungkyung·2019·Diagnostics
DOI 10.3390/diagnostics9020049PMC PMC6627445
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST) specifies effective antibiotic dosage and formulates a profile of empirical therapy for the proper management of an individual patient's health against deadly infections. Therefore, rapid diagnostic plays a pivotal role in the treatment of bacterial infection. In this article, the authors review the socio-economic burden and emergence of antibiotic resistance. An overview of the phenotypic, genotypic, and emerging techniques for AST has been provided and discussed, highlighting the advantages and limitations of each. The historical perspective on conventional methods that have paved the way for modern AST like disk diffusion, Epsilometer test (Etest), and microdilution, is presented. Several emerging methods, such as microfluidic-based optical and electrochemical AST have been critically evaluated. Finally, the challenges related with AST and its outlook in the future are presented.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/diagnostics9020049

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 91

  1. [1]Blair J.M. Webber M.A. Baylay A.J. Ogbolu D.O. Piddock L.J. Molecular mechanisms of antibiotic resistance Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2015 13 42 51 10.1038/nrmicro3380 25435309 · DOI · Paper page
  2. [2]Martínez J.L. Antibiotics and Antibiotic Resistance Genes in Natural Environments Science 2008 321 365 367 10.1126/science.1159483 18635792 · DOI
  3. [4]Van Boeckel T.P. Gandra S. Ashok A. Caudron Q. Grenfell B.T. Levin S.A. Laxminarayan R. Global antibiotic consumption 2000 to 2010: An analysis of national pharmaceutical sales data Lancet Infect. Dis. 2014 14 742 750 10.1016/S1473-3099(14)70780-7 25022435 · DOI
  4. [5]Lee C.-R. Cho I.H. Jeong B.C. Lee S.H. Strategies to Minimize Antibiotic Resistance Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2013 10 4274 4305 10.3390/ijerph10094274 24036486 PMC3799537 · DOI
  5. [6]Ayukekbong J.A. Ntemgwa M. Atabe A.N. The threat of antimicrobial resistance in developing countries: Causes and control strategies Antimicrob. Resist. Infect. Control 2017 6 47 10.1186/s13756-017-0208-x 28515903 PMC5433038 · DOI · Paper page
  6. [7]Brogan D.M. Mossialos E. A critical analysis of the review on antimicrobial resistance report and the infectious disease financing facility Glob. Health 2016 12 8 10.1186/s12992-016-0147-y PMC4802890 27000847 · DOI
  7. [8]Viens A.M. Littmann J. Is Antimicrobial Resistance a Slowly Emerging Disaster? Public Health Ethics 2015 8 255 265 10.1093/phe/phv015 26566396 PMC4638061 · DOI
  8. [9]Kassim A. Omuse G. Premji Z. Revathi G. Comparison of Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute and European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing guidelines for the interpretation of antibiotic susceptibility at a University teaching hospital in Nairobi, Kenya: A cross-sectional study Ann. Clin. Microbiol. Antimicrob. 2016 15 21 10.1186/s12941-016-0135-3 27068515 PMC4827198 · DOI
  9. [10]Ventola C.L. The antibiotic resistance crisis: Part 1: Causes and threats Pharm. Ther. 2015 40 277 283 PMC4378521 25859123
  10. [11]Tacconelli E. Carrara E. Savoldi A. Harbarth S. Mendelson M. Monnet D.L. Pulcini C. Kahlmeter G. Kluytmans J. Carmeli Y. Discovery, research, and development of new antibiotics: The WHO priority list of antibiotic-resistant bacteria and tuberculosis Lancet Infect. Dis. 2018 18 318 327 10.1016/S1473-3099(17)30753-3 29276051 · DOI · Paper page
  11. [12]Bauer A.W. Kirby W.M. Sherris J.C. Turck M. Antibiotic susceptibility testing by a standardized single disk method Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 1966 45 493 496 10.1093/ajcp/45.4_ts.493 5325707 · DOI · Paper page
  12. [13]Reller L.B. Weinstein M. Jorgensen J.H. Ferraro M.J. Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing: A Review of General Principles and Contemporary Practices Clin. Infect. Dis. 2009 49 1749 1755 10.1086/647952 19857164 · DOI · Paper page
  13. [14]Fleming A. On the antibacterial action of cultures of a penicillium, with special reference to their use in the isolation of B. influenzae Br. J. Exp. Pathol. 1929 10 226 10.1093/clinids/2.1.129 PMC2566493 11545337 · DOI
  14. [16]Foster J.W. Woodruff H.B. Microbiological aspects of penicillin: I. Methods of assay J. Bacteriol. 1943 46 187 16560688 PMC373803
  15. [17]Vincent J.G. Vincent H.W. Morton J. Filter Paper Disc Modification of the Oxford Cup Penicillin Determination Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. Med. 1944 55 162 164 10.3181/00379727-55-14502 · DOI
  16. [18]Gavin J.J. Analytical Microbiology: II. The Diffusion Methods Appl. Microbiol. 1957 5 25 13403634 PMC1057248
  17. [19]Hoyt R.E. Levine M.G. A Method for determining Sensitivity to Penicillin and Streptomycin Science (Washington) 1947 171 10.1126/science.106.2747.171 17794155 · DOI
  18. [20]Bondi A. Jr. Spaulding E.H. Smith D.E. Dietz C.C. A routine method for the rapid determination of susceptibility to penicillin and other antibiotics Am. J. Med. Sci. 1947 213 221 225 10.1097/00000441-194702000-00014 20283835 · DOI
  19. [21]Gould J.C. The determination of bacterial sensitivity to antibiotics Edinb. Med. J. 1952 59 178 199 14936918 PMC5274816
  20. [22]Stokes E.J. Antibiotic sensitivity testing Br. Med. J. 1971 2 707 10.1136/bmj.2.5763.707 PMC1796208 5575996 · DOI
  21. [23]Mayrhofer S. Domig K.J. Mair C. Zitz U. Huys G. Kneifel W. Comparison of broth microdilution, Etest, and agar disk diffusion methods for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Lactobacillus acidophilus group members Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2008 74 3745 3748 10.1128/AEM.02849-07 18441109 PMC2446536 · DOI
  22. [26]Hombach M. Zbinden R. Bottger E.C. Standardisation of disk diffusion results for antibiotic susceptibility testing using the sirscan automated zone reader BMC Microbiol. 2013 13 225 10.1186/1471-2180-13-225 24099061 PMC3852248 · DOI
  23. [27]Murray P.R. Antibiotic Susceptibility Testing. Part I Lab. Med. 1983 14 345 350 10.1093/labmed/14.6.345 · DOI
  24. [28]Felmingham D. Brown D.F. Instrumentation in antimicrobial susceptibility testing J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2001 48 81 85 10.1093/jac/48.suppl_1.81 11420341 · DOI
  25. [29]Sageerabanoo S. Malini A. Mangaiyarkarasi T. Hemalatha G. Phenotypic detection of extended spectrum β-lactamase and Amp-C β-lactamase producing clinical isolates in a Tertiary Care Hospital: A preliminary study J. Nat. Sci. Biol. Med. 2015 6 383 387 10.4103/0976-9668.160014 26283835 PMC4518415 · DOI
  26. [30]Sader H.S. Pignatari A.C. E test: A novel technique for antimicrobial susceptibility testing Sao Paulo Med. J. Rev. Paul. Med. 1994 112 635 638 10.1590/S1516-31801994000400003 7481427 · DOI
  27. [32]Rittenberg S.C. Three Centuries of Microbiology. Hubert, A. Lechevalier and Morris Solotorovsky. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1965. viii + 536 pp. Paper, $4.95 Science 1965 149 530 531 10.1126/science.149.3683.530-a · DOI
  28. [33]Poupard J.A. Rittenhouse S.F. Walsh L.R. The evolution of antimicrobial susceptibility testing methods Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing Springer, Plenum Publishing New York, NY, USA 1994 3 14 8209807
  29. [34]Ericsson H.M. Sherris J.C. Antibiotic sensitivity testing. Report of an international collaborative study Acta Pathol. Microbiol. Scand. 1971 90 4325956
  30. [36]Phelps E.B. A method of calculating the numbers of B. coli from the results of dilution tests Am. J. Public Hyg. 1908 18 141 PMC2543481 19599264
  31. [38]Reed J. Report of Advisory Committee on Official Water Standards Public Health Reports Sage Publications, Inc. Teller Road, AK, USA 1925 Volume 40
  32. [39]Greenwood M. Yule G.U. On the statistical interpretation of some bacteriological methods employed in water analysis J. Hyg. 1917 16 36 10.1017/S0022172400006501 20474642 PMC2206908 · DOI
  33. [40]Fisher R.A. Statistical methods for research workers Breakthroughs in Statistics Springer, Oliver & Boyd New York, NY, USA 1992 66 70
  34. [41]Wheat P.F. History and development of antimicrobial susceptibility testing methodology J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2001 48 1 4 10.1093/jac/48.suppl_1.1 11420332 · DOI
  35. [42]Tang Y.-W. Stratton C.W. Advanced Techniques in Diagnostic Microbiology Springer Nashville, TN, USA 2012
  36. [43]Waites K.B. Duffy L.B. Bébéar C.M. Matlow A. Talkington D.F. Kenny G.E. Totten P.A. Bade D.J. Zheng X. Davidson M.K. Standardized methods and quality control limits for agar and broth microdilution susceptibility testing of Mycoplasma pneumoniae, Mycoplasma hominis, and Ureaplasma urealyticum J. Clin. Microbiol. 2012 50 3542 3547 10.1128/JCM.01439-12 22915608 PMC3486213 · DOI
  37. [44]Collins A.M. Craig G. Zaiman E. Roy T.E. A comparison between disk-plate and tube-dilution methods for antibiotic sensitivity testing of bacteria Can. J. Public Health/Rev. Can. Sante’e Publique 1954 45 430 439 13209413
  38. [46]Sanchez M.L. Jones R.N. E test, an antimicrobial susceptibility testing method with broad clinical and epidemiologic application Antimicrob. Newsl. 1992 8 1 7 10.1016/0738-1751(92)90015-3 · DOI
  39. [47]Joyce L.F. Downes J. Stockman K. Andrew J.H. Comparison of five methods, including the PDM Epsilometer test (E test), for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Pseudomonas aeruginosa J. Clin. Microbiol. 1992 30 2709 2713 1400972 PMC270503
  40. [48]Baker C.N. Stocker S.A. Culver D.H. Thornsberry C. Comparison of the E Test to agar dilution, broth microdilution, and agar diffusion susceptibility testing techniques by using a special challenge set of bacteria J. Clin. Microbiol. 1991 29 533 538 2037671 PMC269813
  41. [49]Glupczynski Y. Labbé M. Hansen W. Crokaert F. Yourassowsky E. Evaluation of the E test for quantitative antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Helicobacter pylori J. Clin. Microbiol. 1991 29 2072 2075 1774337 PMC270265
  42. [50]Van Dyck E. Smet H. Piot P. Comparison of E test with agar dilution for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Neisseria gonorrhoeae J. Clin. Microbiol. 1994 32 1586 1588 8077409 PMC264044
  43. [51]Schulz J.E. Sahm D.F. Reliability of the E test for detection of ampicillin, vancomycin, and high-level aminoglycoside resistance in Enterococcus spp. J. Clin. Microbiol. 1993 31 3336 3339 8308134 PMC266427
  44. [52]Cantón R. Livermore D.M. Morosini M.I. Díaz-Regañón J. Rossolini G.M. Etest® versus broth microdilution for ceftaroline MIC determination with Staphylococcus aureus: Results from PREMIUM, a European multicentre study J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2017 72 431 436 10.1093/jac/dkw442 27798220 · DOI
  45. [53]Skov R. Smyth R. Larsen A.R. Bolmstrom A. Karlsson A. Mills K. Frimodt-Moller N. Kahlmeter G. Phenotypic detection of methicillin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus by disk diffusion testing and Etest on Mueller-Hinton agar J. Clin. Microbiol. 2006 44 4395 4399 10.1128/JCM.01411-06 17050809 PMC1698388 · DOI
  46. [54]Hariharan H. Sharma S. Chikweto A. Matthew V. DeAllie C. Antimicrobial drug resistance as determined by the E-test in Campylobacter jejuni, C. coli, and C. lari isolates from the ceca of broiler and layer chickens in Grenada Comp. Immunol. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2009 32 21 28 10.1016/j.cimid.2008.01.010 18329712 · DOI
  47. [55]Falagas M.E. Karageorgopoulos D.E. Extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing organisms J. Hosp. Infect. 2009 73 345 354 10.1016/j.jhin.2009.02.021 19596491 · DOI
  48. [56]Frosch M. Maiden M.C.J. Handbook of Meningococcal Disease: Infection Biology, Vaccination, Clinical Management John Wiley & Sons Hoboken, NJ, USA 2006
  49. [57]Balouiri M. Sadiki M. Ibnsouda S.K. Methods for in vitro evaluating antimicrobial activity: A review J. Pharm. Anal. 2016 6 71 79 10.1016/j.jpha.2015.11.005 29403965 PMC5762448 · DOI · Paper page
  50. [58]Bernardo K. Pakulat N. Macht M. Krut O. Seifert H. Fleer S. Hünger F. Krönke M. Identification and discrimination of Staphylococcus aureus strains using matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry Proteomics 2002 2 747 753 10.1002/1615-9861(200206)2:6<747::AID-PROT747>3.0.CO;2-V 12112858 · DOI
  51. [59]Hrabák J. Chudáčková E. Walková R. Matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization–time of flight (MALDI-TOF) mass spectrometry for detection of antibiotic resistance mechanisms: From research to routine diagnosis Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2013 26 103 114 10.1128/CMR.00058-12 23297261 PMC3553667 · DOI
  52. [60]Jung J. Eberl T. Sparbier K. Lange C. Kostrzewa M. Schubert S. Wieser A. Rapid detection of antibiotic resistance based on mass spectrometry and stable isotopes Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2014 33 949 955 10.1007/s10096-013-2031-5 24338093 · DOI
  53. [61]Zimmermann S. Burckhardt I. Development and Application of MALDI-TOF for Detection of Resistance Mechanisms MALDI-TOF and Tandem MS for Clinical Microbiology John Wiley & Sons Hoboken, NJ, USA 2017 231 248
  54. [63]Sellenriek P. Holmes J. Ferrett R. Drury R. Storch G.A. Comparison of MicroScan Walk-Away®, Phoenix™ and VITEK-TWO® Microbiology systems used in the identification and susceptibility testing of bacteria Proceedings of the Abstr 105th General Meeting of the American Society for Microbiology Atlanta, GA, USA 5–9 June 2005
  55. [64]Wright D.N. Matsen J.M. DiPersio J.R. Kirk M. Saxon B. Ficorilli S.M. Spencer H.J. Evaluation of four newer antimicrobial agents in the Avantage susceptibility test system J. Clin. Microbiol. 1989 27 2381 2383 2584386 PMC267030
  56. [65]Wellinghausen N. Pietzcker T. Poppert S. Belak S. Fieser N. Bartel M. Essig A. Evaluation of the Merlin MICRONAUT System for Rapid Direct Susceptibility Testing of Gram-Positive Cocci and Gram-Negative Bacilli from Positive Blood Cultures J. Clin. Microbiol. 2007 45 789 795 10.1128/JCM.01856-06 17202283 PMC1829091 · DOI
  57. [67]Cockerill F.R. Genetic methods for assessing antimicrobial resistance Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 1999 43 199 212 10.1128/AAC.43.2.199 9925507 PMC89052 · DOI
  58. [68]Fluit A.C. Visser M.R. Schmitz F.-J. Molecular detection of antimicrobial resistance Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2001 14 836 871 10.1128/CMR.14.4.836-871.2001 11585788 PMC89006 · DOI
  59. [69]Miller M.B. Tang Y.-W. Basic Concepts of Microarrays and Potential Applications in Clinical Microbiology Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2009 22 611 633 10.1128/CMR.00019-09 19822891 PMC2772365 · DOI
  60. [70]Li Y. Fan P. Zhou S. Zhang L. Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP): A novel rapid detection platform for pathogens Microb. Pathog. 2017 107 54 61 10.1016/j.micpath.2017.03.016 28323152 · DOI
  61. [71]Athamanolap P. Hsieh K. Chen L. Yang S. Wang T.H. Integrated Bacterial Identification and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing Using PCR and High-Resolution Melt Anal. Chem. 2017 89 11529 11536 10.1021/acs.analchem.7b02809 29027789 · DOI
  62. [72]Frye J.G. Lindsey R.L. Rondeau G. Porwollik S. Long F. McClelland M. Jackson C.R. Englen M.D. Meinersmann R.J. Berrang M.E. Development of a DNA microarray to detect antimicrobial resistance genes identified in the National Center for Biotechnology Information database Microb. Drug Resist. 2010 16 9 19 10.1089/mdr.2009.0082 19916789 PMC3116450 · DOI
  63. [73]Gryadunov D. Mikhailovich V. Lapa S. Roudinskii N. Donnikov M. Pan’kov S. Markova O. Kuz’min A. Chernousova L. Skotnikova O. Evaluation of hybridisation on oligonucleotide microarrays for analysis of drug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2005 11 531 539 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2005.01183.x 15966970 · DOI
  64. [74]Huang W.L. Hsu Z.J. Chang T.C. Jou R. Rapid and accurate detection of rifampin and isoniazid-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis using an oligonucleotide array Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2014 20 O542 O549 10.1111/1469-0691.12517 24372766 · DOI
  65. [75]Sackmann E.K. Fulton A.L. Beebe D.J. The present and future role of microfluidics in biomedical research Nature 2014 507 181 189 10.1038/nature13118 24622198 · DOI · Paper page
  66. [76]Park S. Zhang Y. Lin S. Wang T.H. Yang S. Advances in microfluidic PCR for point-of-care infectious disease diagnostics Biotechnol. Adv. 2011 29 830 839 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2011.06.017 21741465 PMC3186827 · DOI
  67. [77]Ibrahim W.A. Marouf S.A. Erfan A.M. Nasef S.A. Jakee J.K.E. The occurrence of disinfectant and antibiotic-resistant genes in Escherichia coli isolated from chickens in Egypt Vet. World 2019 12 141 145 10.14202/vetworld.2019.141-145 30936668 PMC6431804 · DOI
  68. [78]Chin C.D. Laksanasopin T. Cheung Y.K. Steinmiller D. Linder V. Parsa H. Wang J. Moore H. Rouse R. Umviligihozo G. Microfluidics-based diagnostics of infectious diseases in the developing world Nat. Med. 2011 17 1015 1019 10.1038/nm.2408 21804541 · DOI
  69. [79]Martinez A.W. Phillips S.T. Whitesides G.M. Carrilho E. Diagnostics for the Developing World: Microfluidic Paper-Based Analytical Devices ACS Publications Sterling, VA, USA 2009 20000334
  70. [80]Chen C.H. Lu Y. Sin M.L.Y. Mach K.E. Zhang D.D. Gau V. Liao J.C. Wong P.K. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing using high surface-to-volume ratio microchannels Anal. Chem. 2010 82 1012 1019 10.1021/ac9022764 20055494 PMC2821038 · DOI
  71. [81]Baltekin Ö. Boucharin A. Andersson D.I. Elf J. Fast Antibiotic Susceptibility Testing (FASTest) based on single cell growth rate measurements bioRxiv 2016 10.1101/071407 · DOI
  72. [82]Webb J.S. Barratt S.R. Sabev H. Nixon M. Eastwood I.M. Greenhalgh M. Handley P.S. Robson G.D. Green fluorescent protein as a novel indicator of antimicrobial susceptibility in Aureobasidium pullulans Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2001 67 5614 5620 10.1128/AEM.67.12.5614-5620.2001 11722914 PMC93351 · DOI
  73. [83]Mohan R. Sanpitakseree C. Desai A.V. Sevgen S.E. Schroeder C.M. Kenis P.J.A. A microfluidic approach to study the effect of bacterial interactions on antimicrobial susceptibility in polymicrobial cultures RSC Adv. 2015 5 35211 35223 10.1039/C5RA04092B · DOI
  74. [84]Kalashnikov M. Lee J.C. Campbell J. Sharon A. Sauer-Budge A.F. A microfluidic platform for rapid, stress-induced antibiotic susceptibility testing of Staphylococcus aureus Lab Chip 2012 12 4523 4532 10.1039/c2lc40531h 22968495 PMC3489182 · DOI
  75. [85]Elavarasan T. Chhina S.K. Ash M.P. Sankaran K. Resazurin reduction based colorimetric antibiogram in microfluidic plastic chip Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2013 176 174 180 10.1016/j.snb.2012.10.011 · DOI
  76. [86]Liu T. Lu Y. Gau V. Liao J.C. Wong P.K. Rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing with electrokinetics enhanced biosensors for diagnosis of acute bacterial infections Ann. Biomed. Eng. 2014 42 2314 2321 10.1007/s10439-014-1040-6 24889716 PMC4206609 · DOI
  77. [87]Marques S.M. Esteves da Silva J.C. Firefly bioluminescence: A mechanistic approach of luciferase catalyzed reactions IUBMB Life 2009 61 6 17 10.1002/iub.134 18949818 · DOI
  78. [88]Dong T. Zhao X. Rapid identification and susceptibility testing of uropathogenic microbes via immunosorbent ATP-bioluminescence assay on a microfluidic simulator for antibiotic therapy Anal. Chem. 2015 87 2410 2418 10.1021/ac504428t 25584656 · DOI
  79. [89]Ivančić V. Mastali M. Percy N. Gornbein J. Babbitt J.T. Li Y. Landaw E.M. Bruckner D.A. Churchill B.M. Haake D.A. Rapid antimicrobial susceptibility determination of uropathogens in clinical urine specimens by use of ATP bioluminescence J. Clin. Microbiol. 2008 46 1213 1219 10.1128/JCM.02036-07 18272708 PMC2292911 · DOI
  80. [90]Webster T.A. Sismaet H.J. Goluch E.D. Electrochemically monitoring the antibiotic susceptibility of Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms Analyst 2015 140 7195 7201 10.1039/C5AN01358E 26396994 · DOI
  81. [91]Safavieh M. Pandya H.J. Venkataraman M. Thirumalaraju P. Kanakasabapathy M.K. Singh A. Prabhakar D. Chug M.K. Shafiee H. Rapid Real-Time Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing with Electrical Sensing on Plastic Microchips with Printed Electrodes ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2017 9 12832 12840 10.1021/acsami.6b16571 28291334 PMC5695042 · DOI
  82. [92]Dailey P.J. Osborn J. Ashley E.A. Baron E.J. Dance D.A.B. Fusco D. Fanello C. Manabe Y.C. Mokomane M. Newton P.N. Defining System Requirements for Simplified Blood Culture to Enable Widespread Use in Resource-Limited Settings Diagnostics 2019 9 10 10.3390/diagnostics9010010 PMC6468589 30641976 · DOI
  83. [93]Rodriguez F.D. Simonsson P. Alling C. A method for maintaining constant ethanol concentrations in cell culture media Alcohol Alcohol. 1992 27 309 313 1449566
  84. [94]Dawson A.I. Bacterial Variations Induced by Changes in the Composition of Culture Media J. Bacteriol. 1919 4 133 148 16558828 PMC378798
  85. [95]Schreckenberger P.C. Binnicker M.J. Optimizing Antimicrobial Susceptibility Test Reporting J. Clin. Microbiol. 2011 49 S15 S19 10.1128/JCM.00712-11 · DOI
  86. [96]Martinez J.L. Baquero F. Mutation Frequencies and Antibiotic Resistance Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2000 44 1771 1777 10.1128/AAC.44.7.1771-1777.2000 10858329 PMC89960 · DOI
  87. [97]Khan Z.A. Siddiqui M.F. Park S. Progress in antibiotic susceptibility tests: A comparative review with special emphasis on microfluidic methods Biotechnol. Lett. 2019 41 221 230 10.1007/s10529-018-02638-2 30542946 · DOI
  88. [98]van Belkum A. Dunne W.M. Jr. Next-generation antimicrobial susceptibility testing J. Clin. Microbiol. 2013 51 2018 2024 10.1128/JCM.00313-13 23486706 PMC3697721 · DOI
  89. [99]Kim S. Masum F. Jeon J.S. Recent Developments of Chip-based Phenotypic Antibiotic Susceptibility Testing BioChip J. 2019 13 43 52 10.1007/s13206-019-3109-7 · DOI
  90. [100]Huang X. Xu D. Chen J. Liu J. Li Y. Song J. Ma X. Guo J. Smartphone-based analytical biosensors Analyst 2018 143 5339 5351 10.1039/C8AN01269E 30327808 · DOI
  91. [101]Vergara A. Zboromyrska Y. Mosqueda N. Morosini M.I. García-Fernández S. Roca I. Cantón R. Marco F. Vila J. Evaluation of a Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification-Based Methodology To Detect Carbapenemase Carriage in Acinetobacter Clinical Isolates Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2014 58 7538 7540 10.1128/AAC.03870-14 25224010 PMC4249531 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Khan, Z. A., Siddiqui, M. F., & Park, S.
Affiliations
Korea University of Technology and Education (KR)
Corresponding author
Park, Seungkyung
ORCID
Venue
Diagnostics
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2019-05-03
Volume
9
Issue
2
Pages
49
ISSN
2075-4418 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3390/diagnostics9020049
PMC
PMC6627445
OpenAlex
W2943429827
Cited by
442
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 28 · 2025: 60 · 2024: 77 · 2023: 75 · 2022: 62 · 2021: 86 · 2020: 51 · 2019: 2
FWCI
6.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Diagnostics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2015R1C1A1A01054762)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Clinical Biochemistry › Bacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Medicine › Antibiotic Resistance in Bacteria
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology › Antibiotic Use and Resistance
Keywords
antimicrobial susceptibility testing, antibiotic resistance, phenotypic drug susceptibility testing, disk diffusion, E-test, microdilution, bacterial infection

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review