2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2012.04.034
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assessment of the antifungal susceptibility of Malassezia pachydermatis in various media using a CLSI protocol

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

6
58
0
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 56 publications
(65 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
6
58
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Our isolate showed suboptimal growth on RPMI 1640 medium even with lipid supplementation, hence MIC readings were taken after 48 h [24]. Since our isolate did not grow on Mueller–Hinton medium (with or without oil supplementation), MICs were also determined on SDA for confirming results (Table 1).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 60%
“…Our isolate showed suboptimal growth on RPMI 1640 medium even with lipid supplementation, hence MIC readings were taken after 48 h [24]. Since our isolate did not grow on Mueller–Hinton medium (with or without oil supplementation), MICs were also determined on SDA for confirming results (Table 1).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 60%
“…Although the low azole susceptibility of M. pachydermatis and M. furfur is a well‐documented phenomenon, the mechanisms involved in azole drug defence are completely unknown, therefore the results of this study might serve by having more thorough investigations into these findings. Interestingly, the mechanisms involved in the defence against FLZ might be different from those against VOR as previously reported for Candida spp., since HAL reduces the MIC values of both azoles herein tested, whereas PTZ only those of VOR.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The antifungal susceptibility of M. pachydermatis and M. furfur strains was performed using a modified broth microdilution Clinical and Laboratory Standard Institute protocol (CLSI BMD M27‐A3) . In brief, Sabouraud dextrose broth (SDB, Liofilchem Diagnostici ® , Roseto degli Abruzzi, Italy) with 1% Tween 80 (Sigma Co, Milano, Italy) was used instead of RPMI 1640 medium as previously reported . Stock inoculum suspension was prepared from 4‐day‐old colonies on modified Dixon agar at 32°C in sterile distilled water and adjusted to an optical density of 2.4 McFarland using a turbidimeter (DEN‐1 McFarland Densitometer, Biosan, Riga, Latvia), equivalent to 1‐5 × 10 6 colony forming units (CFU)/mL, as inferred by quantitative plate counts of CFU in Dixon agar.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A variety of alternative procedures, most of which use lipid-enriched media, have been proposed, but published studies have mainly focused on M. pachydermatis susceptibility to ketoconazole, itraconazole, and other azole derivatives (e.g., [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17]. On the contrary, information on the in vitro susceptibility of M. pachydermatis isolates to the polyene amphotericin B, which is commonly used for treating bloodstream infections in human patients (5-7), is scarcer; the available studies were based on a single method and/or a low number of isolates (see Table 1), so the reliability of their results cannot be adequately assessed.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The BMD procedure was performed according to the CLSI guidelines for antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts (18) but using SDB supplemented with 1% (vol/vol) Tween 80 (SDB-T 80 ) as the test medium instead of lipidfree RPMI 1640, as proposed by Cafarchia et al (9)(10)(11) and Eichenberg et al (12). Amphotericin B (Sigma-Aldrich, Madrid, Spain) stock solutions were prepared in 100% dimethyl sulfoxide (Sigma-Aldrich), further diluted in SDB-T 80 , and dispensed into 96-well microdilution trays.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%