Reliability of a terbinafine agar containing method for the screening of dermatophyte resistance
Medical Mycology, ISSN: 1460-2709, Vol: 61, Issue: 5
2023
- 6Citations
- 11Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations6
- Citation Indexes6
- Captures11
- Readers11
- 11
Article Description
The increase in terbinafine resistance worldwide due to Trichophyton indotineae underlies the need for surveillance networks, deploying easy to perform methods to correctly identify resistant isolates and thereby reduce their spread. In the present study, we evaluated the performances of the terbinafine containing agar method (TCAM). Different technical parameters, such as culture medium (RPMI agar [RPMIA] or Sabouraud dextrose agar [SDA]) and inoculum size, were evaluated. Our study showed that terbinafine susceptibility determined using the TCAM was reliable and independent of the inoculum or medium used. We then performed a multicenter, blinded study. 5 isolates of T. indotineae and 15 of genotype I or II of T. interdigitale, including 5 terbinafine-resistant isolates (4 T. indotineae and 1 T. interdigitale), were sent to eight clinical microbiology laboratories. Each laboratory analyzed the 20 isolates’ terbinafine susceptibility by the TCAM using both culture media. TCAM allowed all participants to correctly determine the terbinafine susceptibility of analyzed isolates without prior training. All participants agreed that the dermatophyte tested, regardless of species or genotype, grew better on SDA than on RPMIA medium but accumulated fungal growth after 14 days eventually minimized the effect of this difference. In conclusion, TCAM is a reliable, easy to perform screening method for assessing terbinafine resistance. However, despite good performances, TCAM is a qualitative method and minimal inhibitory concentrations must be determined by the European Committee for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing standardized method to follow the evolution of terbinafine resistance levels.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85161001706&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mmy/myad043; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37076775; https://academic.oup.com/mmy/article/doi/10.1093/mmy/myad043/7131451; https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mmy/myad043; https://academic.oup.com/mmy/article-abstract/61/5/myad043/7131451?redirectedFrom=fulltext
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know