PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Paolo Fazii

Publications and source records attributed to Paolo Fazii.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Management of antifungal susceptibility testing in Italy: comparative results of 2 nationwide surveys (1999 and 2004) in 102 Italian hospitals.

The purpose of this study was to verify the standard procedures and minimum level of knowledge of Italian public laboratories involved in the management of antifungal susceptibility testing (AST). Two nationwide surveys were performed in 1999 and 2004. One hundred and two Italian hospitals located in 85 provincial capitals (82.5%) participated to these surveys. In 1999, 28 (27.5%) laboratories versus 16 (15.7%) in 2004 stated that they did not perform any susceptibility testing. Some discrepancies observed in the survey confirm that AST is difficult to be correctly managed, and that it can be performed only in very well-trained centers. The great variability of the results of MIC determination and clinical interpretation underlines the urgent need to improve knowledge about indications, method choice, and interpretative criteria for AST both for clinical microbiologists and clinicians.

Antifungal Agents↗

The use of a differential fluorescent staining method to detect bacteriuria.

BACKGROUND: This report describes a differential staining method which distinguishes gram-positive from gram-negative bacteria in fluorescence. Gram-positive bacteria appear yellow and gram-negative bacteria appear green. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The method is based on two fluorochromes, one acting in the wavelength of red, i.e. the acridine orange, and another acting in the wavelength of green, i.e. the fluorescein, which together form a red/ green system. In this report we compared the accuracy of the differential fluorescent staining method and the Gram stain in screening for bacteriuria, as detected by conventional cultures. RESULTS: A total of 1487 urine samples were tested. 289 cultures were positive. 237 specimens grew a single organism at 10(5) and 10(4) CFU/ml. 224 smears were detected by the differential fluorescent staining method and 162 were detected by Gram stain. 1198 samples failed to grow organisms at 10(5) and 10(4) CFU/ml. 107 smears were falsely positive by the fluorescent staining procedure and 289 were falsely positive by the Gram stain. On the basis of the culture results, the sensitivity of the differential fluorescent staining method was 94.5% and that of the Gram stain 68.3%. The specificity of the fluorescent staining procedure was 91.6% and that of the Gram stain 75.8%. The positive predictive value and the negative predictive value of the fluorescent staining method were 67.6% and 98.8%, respectively. Those of the Gram stain were 35.9% and 92.3%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A wide range of microbiological and chemical techniques are available to identify bacteria in urine. This fluorescent staining method represents a simple, rapid, reliable method with low-running costs. The main advantage of this technique is that it enables the microbiologist to exclude the presence of bacteria in the urine within a short time after specimen receipt and to eliminate a large number of specimens for culture with significant cost saving. Another advantage of the method is that it allows to distinguish gram-positive from gram-negative bacteria in positive slides on the same day the sample is obtained. The stained smears were easily interpreted, even when the bacterial counts in the specimen were low.

Acridine Orange↗