ライフサイエンスコーパス: antimicrobial susceptibility testing

1 y of an isolate allows for strain typing and antimicrobial susceptibility testing).

2 sm identification and automated-system-based antimicrobial susceptibility testing.

3 quence typing (MLST), plasmid profiling, and antimicrobial susceptibility testing.

4 ted by the NCCLS Subcommittee for Veterinary Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing.

5 nce of accurate organism identification, and antimicrobial susceptibility testing.

6 tion's External Quality Assurance System for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing.

7 bolic profiling provides an avenue for rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing.

8 phoresis, extended virulence genotyping, and antimicrobial susceptibility testing.

9 demonstrated an added value for LC-MS/MS in antimicrobial susceptibility testing.

10 ria promulgated by the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing.

11 for broad-based bacterial identification or antimicrobial susceptibility testing.

12 Antimicrobial susceptibility testing.

13 t bacilli smears, and microbial cultures and antimicrobial susceptibility testing.

14 nating the need for biochemical analysis and antimicrobial susceptibility testing.

15 ime needed for phenotypic identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing.

16 gel electrophoresis (PFGE), serotyping, and antimicrobial susceptibility testing.

17 Typhi strains has emerged worldwide, making antimicrobial susceptibility testing an important functi

18 s of 2004 to 2005 and 2009 to 2010 underwent antimicrobial susceptibility testing and characterizatio

19 pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) and antimicrobial susceptibility testing and examined for th

20 ne can expect to see changes in guidance for antimicrobial susceptibility testing and interpretation.

21 Isolates of C. difficile underwent antimicrobial susceptibility testing and molecular typin

22 Antimicrobial susceptibility testing and pulsed-field ge

23 Antimicrobial susceptibility testing and pulsed-field ge

24 istance mechanisms in staphylococci, current antimicrobial susceptibility testing and reporting recom

25 Isolates underwent antimicrobial susceptibility testing and subtyping by pu

26 ovides an effective quantitative measure for antimicrobial susceptibility testing, and determination

27 e now using WGS for pathogen identification, antimicrobial susceptibility testing, and epidemiologica

28 by the VITEK 2 system for identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing, and the results we

29 In January 2015, the CLSI Subcommittee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing approved these rang

30 which were outside of the United States, for antimicrobial susceptibility testing as part of the Worl

31 Accurate antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) and appropria

32 Here, we report a single cell antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) approach for

33 Accurate and timely performance of antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) by the clinic

34 Routine antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) can prevent d

35 The long turnaround time in antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) endangers pat

36 Antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) is a fundamen

37 The speed of conventional antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) is intrinsica

38 Three commercial antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) methods were

39 oenix system for the identification (ID) and antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) of 251 isolat

40 Sparks, MD) for the identification (ID) and antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) of challenge

41 Antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) of clinical i

42 signed for the rapid identification (ID) and antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) of clinically

43 Antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) of these isol

44 Antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) of these prob

45 rovide rapid species identification (ID) and antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) results for t

46 The present study compared the antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) results gener

47 ast majority of bacterial identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) results were

48 boring MRSA, including three (semi)automated antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) systems and f

49 sistant Klebsiella pneumoniae demands faster antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) to guide anti

50 atory practice in the preanalytical phase of antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) was evaluated

51 determining the optimal frequency of repeat antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) when an organ

52 Antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) with 13 agent

53 Rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) would decreas

54 ISA (hVISA) are pathogens for which accurate antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) would rule ou

55 harmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST), and how thes

56 assay was adapted for use in broad-spectrum antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST).

57 n and facilitates rapid bacterial growth for antimicrobial susceptibility testing at the point of car

58 large surface-to-volume ratio, toward rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing at the point of car

59 dy were approved by the CLSI Subcommittee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing at their June 2015

60 simple microfluidic device that can perform antimicrobial susceptibility testing automatically via a

61 Antimicrobial susceptibility testing, broth enriched cul

62 through 10 May 2016 underwent routine Etest antimicrobial susceptibility testing by the Hawaii Depar

63 enotypic analysis, including biochemical and antimicrobial susceptibility testing, cellular fatty aci

64 em, were determined by the dielectrophoretic antimicrobial susceptibility testing (dAST) and by the c

65 Notably, antimicrobial susceptibility testing demonstrated good o

66 or =1 microg/ml by the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing]; disk diffusion br

67 tion's External Quality Assurance System for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EQAS-AST) from Jan

68 s Institute (CLSI) and European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) broth micr

69 s Institute (CLSI) and European Committee of Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) methodolog

70 k breakpoints, and the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) S. pseudin

71 on (BMD) method of the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) was compar

72 e data collated by the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST).

73 stitute (CLSI) and the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST).

74 Antimicrobial susceptibility testing expense may be a si

75 enterococci following a laboratory change in antimicrobial susceptibility testing from disk diffusion

76 The NCCLS Subcommittee for Veterinary Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing has recently approv

77 ofluidic device provides a simple method for antimicrobial susceptibility testing in an automated for

78 ds were approved by the CLSI Subcommittee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing in January 2015 and

79 terobacteriaceae family poses a challenge to antimicrobial susceptibility testing in the clinical lab

80 Antimicrobial susceptibility testing in the presence of

81 tandards Institute and European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing interpretative stan

82 The applicability of microfluidic rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing is demonstrated in

83 Because antimicrobial susceptibility testing is not routinely do

84 Accurate antimicrobial susceptibility testing is vital for patien

85 Antimicrobial-susceptibility testing is performed to det

86 f identification to bacterial species level, antimicrobial susceptibility testing, macrolide resistan

87 atory Standards Institute (CLSI) revised the antimicrobial susceptibility testing method for telavanc

88 should consider using a second, independent antimicrobial susceptibility testing method to validate

89 Each organism was tested by the routine antimicrobial susceptibility testing method used by each

90 train was tested by the laboratory's routine antimicrobial susceptibility testing method.

91 g was performed by the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing methodology.

92 up organisms on the selection of appropriate antimicrobial susceptibility testing methods and interpr

93 However, the accuracy of some antimicrobial susceptibility testing methods for detecti

94 To assess the abilities of various antimicrobial susceptibility testing methods to detect E

95 WGS was as sensitive and specific as routine antimicrobial susceptibility testing methods.

96 me geographic area using broth microdilution antimicrobial susceptibility testing, multilocus sequenc

97 Significantly, the results of antimicrobial susceptibility testing obtained for our is

98 Antimicrobial susceptibility testing of 66 isolates reve

99 uld be developed, and the optimal method for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of A. xylosoxidans

100 Thus, the antimicrobial susceptibility testing of B. pertussis can

101 Present methods of antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Bordetella pertu

102 tion and the agar disk diffusion methods for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Campylobacter we

103 Antimicrobial susceptibility testing of isolates from 47

104 as been used to reduce the time required for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Mycobacterium tu

105 s for the performance and quality control of antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Mycoplasma pneum

106 methods decrease the time to identification/antimicrobial susceptibility testing of S. aureus and de

107 ods take several days for identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing of staphylococcal i

108 It appears to be an acceptable method for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of staphylococci an

109 in S. aureus, Vitek 2 performed reliably for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of staphylococci an

110 Seven commercial systems for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Streptococcus pn

111 control limits and interpretive criteria for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Streptococcus pn

112 In vitro antimicrobial susceptibility testing of the conjugate ag

113 Antimicrobial susceptibility testing of the samples iden

114 lity control (QC) standards for the in vitro antimicrobial susceptibility testing of two fastidious v

115 The utility of Etest for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Yersinia pestis

116 We performed antimicrobial susceptibility testing on all 2767 sero19A

117 A bloodstream isolates were characterized by antimicrobial susceptibility testing, PCR analysis of vi

118 Isolates were serotyped and antimicrobial susceptibility testing performed.

119 e isolates were characterized by serotyping, antimicrobial-susceptibility testing, phage typing, and

120 The isolates underwent antimicrobial susceptibility testing, pulsed-field gel e

121 ble S. aureus isolates were characterized by antimicrobial-susceptibility testing, pulsed-field gel e

122 The delayed reporting of antimicrobial susceptibility testing remains a limiting

123 ysis interpretation, culture thresholds, and antimicrobial susceptibility testing, require special co

124 ) CD-ROM on AST, and (iv) the CDC Multilevel Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing Resource website.

125 high degree of correlation of serotyping and antimicrobial susceptibility testing results between fou

126 increased the importance of having accurate antimicrobial susceptibility testing results for guiding

127 We compared the antimicrobial susceptibility testing results generated b

128 Antimicrobial susceptibility testing revealed several di

129 tant but clindamycin susceptible by in vitro antimicrobial susceptibility testing should be tested fo

130 ified selection for changes in motility, and antimicrobial susceptibility testing suggested that the

131 nc., Durham, NC) is a widely used commercial antimicrobial susceptibility testing system.

132 apid ID 32 Strep identification methods, and antimicrobial susceptibility testing to determine their

133 esis (PFGE) following SmaI macrorestriction, antimicrobial susceptibility testing, urease production,

134 human clinical specimens, were subjected to antimicrobial susceptibility testing using a MicroScan W

135 We present a method for rapid and scalable antimicrobial susceptibility testing using stationary na

136 Antimicrobial susceptibility testing using the agar dilu

137 lobacter spp. and E. coli were isolated, and antimicrobial susceptibility testing was conducted using

138 Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed by Se

139 Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed by st

140 Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed follo

141 Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed on 21

142 Whole genome sequencing and antimicrobial susceptibility testing were done on 168 co

143 ngoing national surveillance, serotyping and antimicrobial susceptibility testing were done on all pn

144 culture, manual speciation, serotyping, and antimicrobial susceptibility testing were performed at M

145 Pneumococcal serotyping and antimicrobial susceptibility testing were performed on 4

146 apid ID 32 Strep identification methods; and antimicrobial susceptibility testing were performed on t

147 Culture-based identification methods and antimicrobial susceptibility testing were used as the re

148 od, Mo.), an established automated method of antimicrobial susceptibility testing with the ability to