4.6 Review

Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing: A Comprehensive Review of Currently Used Methods

期刊

ANTIBIOTICS-BASEL
卷 11, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics11040427

关键词

antimicrobial susceptibility testing; antimicrobial resistance; methods

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Antimicrobial resistance poses a significant threat to global public health. Accurate and rapid detection of antibiotic resistance and appropriate treatment methods are crucial for controlling its emergence. However, traditional testing methods are time-consuming and costly, highlighting the need for innovative approaches.
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has emerged as a major threat to public health globally. Accurate and rapid detection of resistance to antimicrobial drugs, and subsequent appropriate antimicrobial treatment, combined with antimicrobial stewardship, are essential for controlling the emergence and spread of AMR. This article reviews common antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) methods and relevant issues concerning the advantages and disadvantages of each method. Although accurate, classic technologies used in clinical microbiology to profile antimicrobial susceptibility are time-consuming and relatively expensive. As a result, physicians often prescribe empirical antimicrobial therapies and broad-spectrum antibiotics. Although recently developed AST systems have shown advantages over traditional methods in terms of testing speed and the potential for providing a deeper insight into resistance mechanisms, extensive validation is required to translate these methodologies to clinical practice. With a continuous increase in antimicrobial resistance, additional efforts are needed to develop innovative, rapid, accurate, and portable diagnostic tools for AST. The wide implementation of novel devices would enable the identification of the optimal treatment approaches and the surveillance of antibiotic resistance in health, agriculture, and the environment, allowing monitoring and better tackling the emergence of AMR.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据