Hart CM

Language: Spanish
References: 12
Page: 30-37
PDF size: 225.58 Kb.

ABSTRACT

In past years the microbiological diagnosis has been favorably modified due to the significant current technological development. The introduction of automated equipments to identify etiological agents of infectious diseases from the microbiological cultures and its corresponding studies of antimicrobial sensitivity, has involved a marked improvement in the time to achieve results, a greater sensitivity or positive samples both from blood cultures and other sterile fluids, an improvement and lengthening in identification of microorganisms, a greater reliability and reproducibility of the antimicrobial sensitivity studies, to answer to the great development of molecular biology and to changes derived in taxonomy of microorganisms. The objective of automation is to improve the sensitivity and specificity of microbiological tests shortening the time waiting for useful and reliable results. Introduction of these methods depends in a greater measure of medical care level, the type of patient and the hospital’s size for a better clinical application without rule out the cost-benefit studies since we must to take into account the use and rationalization of available resources. Present paper shows some of our results and the impact of this technology on a third level medical care hospital.

REFERENCES

1. Robinson A, Marcon M, Mortensen JE, McCarter YS, LaRocco M, Peterson LR, et al. Controversies affecting the future of clinical microbiology. J Clin Microbiol 1999;37:883-9.

2. Poupard JA, Rittenhouse SF, Walsh LR. The evolution of antimicrobial susceptibility testing methods. En: Poupard JA, Walsh LR, Kleger B, eds. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing. New York: Plenum Press, 1994;3-14.

3. Soloaga, r., Almuzara, m., Casimir, L. et al. Sistema automatizado de hemocultivos Bact-Alert: 5 vs 7 días de incubación: Primer estudio multicéntrico argentino. Rev. Argent. Microbiol. ene./mar. 2004, vol.36, no.1.24-27.

4. Herwaldt La, Geiss The positive predictive valuo isolating coagulase negative staphylococcus from blood culture. Clin infection Dis.1996, 22:14.

5. Diomedis P, Alexis. Infecciones por Acinetobacter baumannii pan-resistente: Consideraciones epidemiológicas y de manejo antimicrobiano actualizado. Rev. chil. infectol., dic. 2005, vol.22, no.4, p.298-320. ISSN 0716-1018.

6. Cantón, E., Viudes, Á y Pemán, J: Infección sistémica nosocomial por levaduras. Forum micológico Rev Iberoam Micol 2001; 18: 51-55.

7. Taller Automatización del diagnostico Microbiología en Latinoamérica. Disponible en http// www.aam.org.ar/ actividades/T_AUTOMATIZACION.pdf Acceso 2 febrero 2009.

8. Medeiros AA, Kent RL, O'Brien TF. Characterization and prevalence of the different mechanisms of resistance to _-lactam antibiotics in clinical isolates of Escherichia coli. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1974;6:791-801.

9. Loza Fernández de Bobadilla E, Martínez-Beltrán J. Evolución de laactividad de cefotaxima en 6 años y fenotipos de sensibilidad en Enterobacteriaceae. Enf Infec Microbiol Clin 1988;6(Suppl 1):3-13.

10. Cantón Moreno Rafael. Lectura interpretada del antibiograma: ¿ejercicio intelectual o necesidad clínica Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin 2002;20(4):176-86.

11. Grupo MENSURA. Recomendaciones del grupo MENSURA para la selección de antimicrobianos en el estudio de la sensibilidad y criterios para la interpretación del antibiograma. Rev Esp Quimioterap 2000; 13: 73-86.

12. Rahal JJ, Urban C, Segal-Mauras S. Nosocomial antibiotic resistance in multiple gram-negative species: experience at one hospital with squeezing the resistance ballom at multiple sites. Clin Infect Dis 2002;34:499-503.