Validation of Diffusion Methods for Macrolide Susceptibility Testing of Helicobacter pylori

Le résumé fourni par la source

Helicobacter pylori resistance to macrolides is increasing, and the need for susceptibility testing has become crucial. The only standardized method is agar dilution, which is not adapted to clinical practice. The present work aimed: (1) to optimize the technical conditions and to assess the reproducibility of the E-test and disk diffusion method for macrolides susceptibility testing of H. pylori, and (2) to assess the performances of these two phenotypic methods in detecting strains harboring a resistance mechanism to macrolides. We used 191 isolates collected in nine centers of France and Belgium. Phenotypic tests were performed on Mueller-Hinton agar supplemented with 10% horse blood, inoculated with a 2-day-old H. pylori suspension (10(8) CFU/ml), and incubated for 72 hr at 37 degrees C under microaerophilic conditions. The reproducibility studied on two randomly selected strains was better for disk diffusion than for the E-test for both clarithromycin and erythromycin. For a subset of 10 strains, the MICs of erythromycin and clarithromycin did not differ from more than one two-fold dilution when determined by E-test or agar dilution method. The breakpoints were for MICs: 1 mg/L for both clarithromycin and erythromycin and for inhibition diameters, 22 mm for clarithromycin and 17 mm for erythromycin. There was a 100% concordance between susceptibility to erythromycin and clarithromycin. However, the susceptible and resistant populations were better separated by testing erythromycin. Of 34 resistant strains, two lacked the A2142G and A2143G point mutations in 23S rRNA by PCR-RFLP. None of 15 tested sensitive strains were positive for one of these two point mutations. For clinical practice, we recommend to assess macrolide susceptibility of H. pylori by using one of these two phenotypic methods under the described technical conditions.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.