Colin R. MacKenzie

Country flagGermany

Research Interests

Explore related searches

Contact this professor

Get a free first email built on one of their papers, ready for you to edit and send yourself.

Articles (11)

Year:

2024

Year:

2023

Coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS), members of the skin commensal microbiota, are increasingly associated with local or systemic infections due to a shift in patient populations in recent decades. Subsequently, more CoNS strains have been subjected to antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST), thus leading to the increased detection of teicoplanin resistance. However, data concerning teicoplanin resistance among CoNS strains remain limited, heterogeneous, and inconclusive. We collected 162 consecutive CoNS strains identified using Vitek-2 as teicoplanin-resistant and tested them with a range of AST methods. The results of standard and high inoculum broth microdilution (sBMD; hBMD), agar dilution (AD) after 24 h and 48 h incubation, standard and macrogradient diffusion strip (sGDT, MET), screening agar, and disc diffusion were compared to assess their robustness and to establish a diagnostic algorithm to detect teicoplanin resistance. sBMD was used as the reference method, and the lowest number of strains were teicoplanin-resistant using this method. sGDT and disc diffusion generated similar results to sBMD. Compared with sBMD, AD-24 h generated the lowest number of false teicoplanin-resistant strains, followed by hBMD, AD-48 h, and Vitek-2. sGDT, a fast, easy, affordable method in diagnostic settings, generated the highest rate of false teicoplanin-susceptible strains. Vitek-2 testing produced the highest number of teicoplanin-resistant strains. Only in two strains was the initial Vitek-2 teicoplanin resistance confirmed using five other AST methods. In conclusion, the different antibiotic susceptibility testing methods generated inconsistent, inconclusive, and discrepant results, thus making it difficult to establish a diagnostic algorithm for suspected teicoplanin resistance. Teicoplanin testing proved to be challenging and easily influenced by technical factors. This study aimed not only to raise awareness of teicoplanin resistance testing but also of the need for future studies focusing on the clinical efficacy of teicoplanin in relation to its susceptibility results.

Year:

2023

Year:

2023

Year:

2022

Year:

2022

Year:

2022

Year:

2022

Year:

2022

Year:

2022

Year:

2022

Collaborators (6)

C.T. Berger

-

SWITZERLAND
View details

Tom Luedde

-

GERMANY
View details

Sarah V. Walker

University Hospital Bonn

GERMANY
View details

David Boulware

University of Minnesota

UNITED STATES
View details

Matthias Maiwald

Senior Consultant and Associate Professor

KK Women's and Children's Hospital

SINGAPORE
View details

Torsten Feldt

-

GERMANY
View details
ApplyKite TwinLearns as you apply

Make your next move.

Prepare your application

Review drafts before you send them.