The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

24 protocols using cefoxitin

1

Antimicrobial Susceptibility Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
A detailed antimicrobial (IMP, meropenem, cefoxitin, ceftazidime, cefpodoxime, ceftriaxone, amikacin, gentamicin, trimethoprim–sulfamethoxazole, polymyxin B, colistin, tigecycline, and fluoroquinolones (Becton Dickinson, Sparks, MD, USA) susceptibility analysis was conducted using the disc diffusion method according to CLSI guidelines.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Antibiotic Susceptibility Testing Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The standard disc diffusion method was processed for Antibiotic Susceptibility Testing (AST) according to CLSI guidelines (5 (link)) including the following discs: Boronic acid 250 µg, Cloxacillin 500 µg (Neosensitabs, Rosco Diagnostica S/A, Taastrup, Denmark), Cefotetan 30 µg, Aztreonam 30 µg (ATM), Ceftazidime 30 µg (CAZ), Cefepime 30 µg (FEP), Imipenem 10 µg (IPM), Cefoxitin 30 µg (FOX), Cefotaxime 30 µg (CTX), Ceftriaxone 30 µg (CRO), Cefpodoxime 10 µg (CPD) [Becton Dickinson Microbiology Systems, Cockeysville, Md.], Augmentin 30 µg (Aug) (Oxoid Ltd, Basingstoke, UK), Ceftazidime with Clavulanic Acid (30 µg,10 µg) (CAZ+CLAV), Cefotaxime with Clavulanic Acid (30 µg, 10 µg) (CTX+CLAV), piperacillin-tazobactam (PTZ), (Bio-Rad, Marnes-La-Coquette, France). Distance between Cloxacillin, and each of CAZ and FOX, and that between Boronic acid 250 µg and each of the two combination discs (Ceftazidime and Cefotaxime with Clavulanic Acid) were 10 mm edge to edge (Figure 1).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Disc Diffusion Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The disc diffusion method was performed on Mueller-Hinton agar plates (bioMerieux) with following antibiotic paper discs - disc content (μg): cefoxitin (30 μg), erythromycin (15 μg), clindamycin (2 μg), mupirocin (10 μg), gentamicin (10 μg), amikacin (10 μg), tetracycline (30 μg), chloramphenicol (30 μg), trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (cotrimoxazole) (1.25/23.75 μg), (Becton Dickinson, USA). Tests were performed and interpreted according to the guidelines of the European Committee of Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) [16 ].
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Antibiotic Susceptibility of S. aureus

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The susceptibility of S. aureus strains to 30 µg cefoxitin (Becton Dickinson, Franklin Lakes, NJ, USA) and 1 µg oxacillin (Becton Dickinson, Franklin Lakes, NJ, USA) was determined by the disc diffusion test, according to the CLSI guidelines [29 ]. The suspensions 0.5 McFarland standard, equivalent to 1.5 × 108 colony-forming units/mL (CFU/mL), were spread with a sterile swab on Mueller-Hinton agar (MHA) plates (Oxoid, Milan, Italy) and the disks were applied to the surface. After incubation for 24 h at 35 °C, the diameter inhibition zone was determined. S. aureus ATCC 6538 was used as a reference strain (negative control).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Antibiotic Resistance Profiling of Bacteria

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The test was carried out using the disk diffusion method on Mueller-Hinton agar, according to the guidelines of the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI 2012). The following antimicrobials were used: ampicillin 10 lg (AMP), ceftazidime 30 lg (CAZ), cefotaxime 30 lg (CTX), cefoxitin (FOX), nalidixic acid 30 lg (NAL), ciprofloxacin 5 lg (CIP), tetracycline (TET), gentamicin (GEN) and amikacin (AK) (Becton Dickinson, Sparks, MD, USA). The ATCC 25922 Escherichia coli strain was used as quality control micro-organism. Isolates resistant to b-lactam antimicrobials were subjected to ESBL confirmatory test using cefotaxime and ceftazidime on their own and in association with 10 lg clavulanic acid (CLA). All isolates were classified as resistant, intermediate or susceptible as described previously (CLSI 2015) . Isolates were considered as MDR when resistance to three or more classes of antimicrobial agents was observed as proposed previously (Magiorakos et al. 2011 ).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Antimicrobial Susceptibility Profiling

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Antimicrobial susceptibility was determined by disc diffusion according to the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. The antimicrobial agents tested were cefoxitin, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, clindamycin, erythromycin, ciprofloxacin, tetracycline, gentamicin and rifampicin (Becton Dickinson, Heidelberg, Germany). Inducible clindamycin resistance was tested for all isolates resistant to erythromycin and susceptible to clindamycin [11] .
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Antibiotic Susceptibility Profiling of Isolates

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Antibiotic susceptibility pattern of isolates was performed using the disc diffusion method on Mueller Hinton Agar (Condalab, Spain) according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) guideline for the following antibiotics: penicillin (10 μg), cefepime (30 μg), cefoxitin (30 μg), sulfamethoxazole (23/75 μg), tazobactam (10 μg) + piperacillin (100 μg), cefotaxime (30 μg), ceftriaxone (30 μg), meropenem (10 µg), clindamycin (2 μg), clarithromycin (15 μg), levofloxacin (5 μg), azithromycin (15 μg) (BD-BBL Company, USA). The Minimum Inhibitory Concentration (MIC) of colistin and vancomycin was determined using the broth microdilution method. Bacterial isolates resistant to three or more different antimicrobial classes were identified as MDR isolates. S. aureus (ATCC 25923) and E. coli (ATCC 25922) were used as control strains.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Antibiotic Susceptibility Testing Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was done by the Kirby-Bauer standard disk diffusion method [11] according to CLSI guidelines [12] for different antimicrobial agents like: ceftazidime (30 µg), cefotaxime (30 µg), cefpodoxime (10 µg), ceftriaxone (30 µg), cefepime (30 µg), aztreonam (30 µg), ampicillin (10 µg), piperacillin (100 µg), cefoxitin (30 µg), gentamicin (120 µg), amikacin (30 µg), ciprofloxacin (5 µg), tetracycline (30 µg), minocycline (30 µg), chloramphenicol (30 µg), trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (1.25 µg/23.75 µg), colistin (10 µg), ertapenem (10 µg) and meropenem (10 µg) (BD Diagnostics, Franklin Lakes, NJ, USA).
The MIC values (mg/L) of cefotaxime, ertapenem, meropenem, amikacin, gentamicin and tigecycline were determined using Etest method (AB Biodisk, Solna, Sweden) and were interpreted according to CLSI guidelines as modified in 2013. The clinical breakpoints for meropenem were as follows: susceptible (S) ≤1.0 mg/L, intermediate (I) 2.0–3.0 mg/L, and resistant (R) ≥4.0 mg/L. The same for ertapenem were as follows: S ≤0.5 mg/L, I: 1.0 mg/L, R ≥2 mg/L. MIC50 and MIC90 of meropenem were calculated as the MIC at which 50% and 90% of the isolates were inhibited.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing of CA-MRSA

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
All S. aureus isolates were identified by mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF, Biotyper, Bruker Daltonic GmBH, Bremen, Germany). The susceptibility of CA-MRSA isolates was tested against 16 antimicrobial agents using the disk diffusion method according to the guidelines of the Clinical Laboratory Standard Institute (CLSI) (13 ). The antibiotics tested were penicillin, cefoxitin, vancomycin, gentamicin, tobramycin, kanamycin, erythromycin, clindamycin, tetracycline, ciprofloxacin, trimethoprimsulfamethoxazole, chloramphenicol, rifampin, linezolid, mupirocin and fusidic acid (BD, Maryland, USA). Minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) determination of oxacillin was performed using the E-test (bioMerieux, Marcy I’Etoile, France).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

Isolation and Typing of C. difficile from Fecal Samples

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Fecal samples were collected from patients previously identified as colonized or infected with C. difficile and plated anaerobically onto brain heart infusion (BHI) agar plates supplemented with yeast extract, cysteine, and the antibiotics cycloserine and cefoxitin (BHI and yeast extract were from BD Biosciences, and the other components were from Sigma-Aldrich). Individual colonies that were able to grow in the presence of these antibiotics and that had the characteristic phenotype of C. difficile were selected, isolated, and then typed using MLST (24 (link)).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand

About PubCompare

Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.

We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.

However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.

Ready to get started?

Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required

Sign up now

Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!