In the evolving landscape of infectious diseases, the specter of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) looms large, presenting an increasingly formidable challenge to public health across the globe. The phenomenon of AMR occurs when bacteria, viruses, fungi, and parasites change over time and no longer respond to medicines, making common infections harder to treat and increasing the risk of disease spread, severe illness, and death. As a direct consequence, the effectiveness of the antibiotics that have once revolutionized medicine by rendering previously lethal diseases treatable is now under threat. This crisis is exacerbated by the misuse and overuse of antimicrobials in humans, animals, and agriculture, coupled with the alarmingly slow pace of new antibiotic development. The World Health Organization (WHO) has declared AMR as one of the top 10 global public health threats facing humanity, underscoring the critical need for concerted action to mitigate its impact.^1,2

Against this backdrop, Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (AST) emerges as a pivotal tool in the healthcare arsenal, playing a vital role in both individual patient care and broader epidemiological surveillance. AST enables clinicians to identify the most effective antimicrobial agents for treating infections caused by specific pathogens, thereby optimizing therapeutic outcomes, minimizing the use of broad-spectrum antibiotics, and ultimately contributing to the fight against AMR. Beyond its clinical utility, AST provides invaluable data for monitoring resistance trends, guiding public health policies, and informing antibiotic stewardship programs aimed at preserving the effectiveness of existing antimicrobial drugs.^3,4

Among the various methodologies employed for AST, the disk diffusion methods, notably the Kirby-Bauer and Stokes techniques, stand out for their widespread adoption in clinical microbiology laboratories worldwide. The Kirby-Bauer method, characterized by its standardized procedure, employs Mueller-Hinton agar as a culture medium to assess the susceptibility of bacteria to antibiotics based on the diameter of the inhibition zones surrounding antibiotic-impregnated disks. This method's simplicity, cost-effectiveness, and broad applicability have cemented its status as a cornerstone of routine susceptibility testing. Conversely, the Stokes method, with its comparative approach assessing test and control strains on the same agar plate, offers a nuanced alternative that can provide additional insights under specific circumstances.^5,6

The disk diffusion methods' enduring relevance in the AST landscape is testament to their fundamental role in guiding effective antimicrobial therapy and combating the spread of AMR. However, as the microbial world continues to evolve and the arms race against AMR intensifies, the continuous refinement and adaptation of AST methodologies, including the disk diffusion techniques, will be paramount. In this pursuit, the integration of technological advancements and collaborative global efforts will be crucial in ensuring that AST remains a bulwark against the ever-changing threat of infectious diseases.

Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (AST): A Pillar in the Fight against Antimicrobial Resistance

The relentless advance of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) represents one of the most daunting public health challenges of the 21st century, threatening to render obsolete the very arsenal of antibiotics that have transformed medicine and saved countless lives over the past century. In this dire context, Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (AST) emerges not merely as a routine diagnostic procedure but as a critical bulwark in the global struggle to outpace the evolving threat posed by resistant microbial pathogens. This section delves into the pivotal role of AST in contemporary healthcare and microbiology, elucidating its objectives, significance, and the various methodologies employed, with a particular focus on the disk diffusion method's enduring prominence.^1,2

The primary purpose of AST is twofold: first, to guide clinicians in selecting the most effective antimicrobial agent for the treatment of infections caused by bacteria and, second, to gather vital epidemiological data on the patterns of resistance exhibited by these microorganisms. By accurately determining the susceptibility of bacteria to various antibiotics, AST informs targeted therapy, ensuring that patients receive the most appropriate and effective treatment. This not only enhances clinical outcomes but also minimizes the misuse of antibiotics, a key factor driving the development of resistance.^3,5

Moreover, AST plays an indispensable role in the surveillance of antimicrobial resistance. Through the systematic collection and analysis of susceptibility data, researchers and public health officials can track the emergence and spread of resistance genes and resistant strains across communities, healthcare settings, and borders. This epidemiological intelligence is crucial for informing public health strategies, guiding antibiotic stewardship programs, and shaping policy interventions aimed at curbing the tide of resistance.^3,5

AST encompasses a variety of techniques, ranging from broth dilution and agar dilution to gradient diffusion and the disk diffusion method. Each method has its advantages and limitations, with applicability varying based on the organism in question, the antibiotics being tested, and the clinical or research context.^7,8

Among these, the disk diffusion method stands out for its simplicity, cost-effectiveness, and broad applicability, making it one of the most widely used AST techniques worldwide. Developed in the 1950s, this method involves placing antibiotic-impregnated paper disks on an agar plate inoculated with the test organism. As the antibiotic diffuses into the agar, it establishes a gradient of concentration. The key outcome measure is the zone of inhibition—the area around the disk where bacterial growth is prevented—whose diameter provides a direct indication of the organism's susceptibility to the antibiotic.^8,9

The Kirby-Bauer and Stokes disk diffusion methods are two prominent variations of this technique, each with specific protocols and interpretative criteria. The Kirby-Bauer method, standardized by the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI), is renowned for its reproducibility and ease of use, making it a staple in clinical microbiology laboratories. Conversely, the Stokes method, offering a comparative approach by juxtaposing the test organism's response to that of a control strain, provides an alternative that can be particularly useful in certain diagnostic and research settings.^7,9

AST, with its vital role in guiding effective antimicrobial therapy and monitoring resistance patterns, is an indispensable tool in the contemporary medical and microbiological arsenal. Among the various methods employed, the disk diffusion technique, exemplified by the Kirby-Bauer and Stokes methods, remains a cornerstone of AST due to its practicality, reliability, and adaptability to diverse settings. As the threat of antimicrobial resistance continues to escalate, the importance of AST—and the need for ongoing innovation and standardization within this field—cannot be overstated.^8,9

The Disk Diffusion Method: Principles, Procedures, and Protocols

The disk diffusion method is a cornerstone of antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST), renowned for its simplicity, efficacy, and the critical role it plays in the stewardship of antimicrobial therapies. This technique, leveraging the diffusion of antibiotics from impregnated disks into a culture medium, allows for the straightforward assessment of bacterial susceptibility to antimicrobial agents. This section elucidates the fundamental principles and procedural steps of the disk diffusion method, with a focus on the widely adopted Kirby-Bauer and Stokes protocols.^3,7

At the heart of the disk diffusion method is the principle that antibiotics diffuse radially into the agar medium from paper disks, creating a gradient of concentration. The essence of this method lies in the observation of the zone of inhibition — a clear area surrounding the disk where bacterial growth is inhibited due to the presence of the antibiotic. The size of this zone is inversely proportional to the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of the antibiotic against the bacteria, providing a visual and measurable indicator of susceptibility.^8,9

A critical component of this method is the use of Mueller-Hinton agar (MHA), the standard medium due to its optimal characteristics: it supports the growth of most non-fastidious pathogens, exhibits batch-to-batch consistency, and has minimal inhibitory effect on the antibiotics commonly tested, such as sulfonamides and trimethoprim. The procedure begins with the inoculation of a standardized bacterial suspension onto the surface of an MHA plate, followed by the placement of antibiotic-impregnated disks on the agar. After incubation, the zones of inhibition are measured, with their diameters serving as the basis for interpreting bacterial susceptibility.^9,10

The Kirby-Bauer disk diffusion method, standardized by the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI), is a protocol revered for its precision, reproducibility, and widespread adoption in clinical microbiology laboratories. The procedure unfolds as follows:^10-12

• Inoculum Preparation: A bacterial suspension is prepared to match the 0.5 McFarland standard, ensuring a standardized density of approximately 1.5 × 10⁸ CFU/mL.

• Inoculation of MHA Plate: The prepared suspension is evenly spread across a Mueller-Hinton agar plate to ensure uniform bacterial growth.

• Application of Antibiotic Discs: Antibiotic-impregnated paper disks are carefully placed on the agar surface, ensuring proper spacing to prevent overlapping zones of inhibition.

• Incubation and Measurement: The plate is incubated, typically at 35-37°C for 16-18 hours, after which the diameters of the zones of inhibition are measured. The measurements are then interpreted according to CLSI guidelines to categorize the bacteria as susceptible, intermediate, or resistant to the antibiotics tested.

The Stokes method presents an alternative approach, especially useful in settings where direct comparison to a control strain is advantageous. This method is characterized by its unique layout and comparative analysis:^11-13

• Division of MHA Plate: The agar surface is divided, with the test organism inoculated on one section and a control strain on another, separated by an uninoculated gap.

• Application of Antibiotic Discs: Antibiotic disks are applied both to the test organism area and the control area, allowing for a direct comparison of the zones of inhibition.

• Measurement and Comparison: After incubation, the zones around the test and control strains are measured. The susceptibility of the test organism is determined by comparing its zone sizes to those of the control, with specific criteria for categorizing the organism as sensitive, intermediate, or resistant.

The Modified Stokes method inverts this layout, placing the control organism in the center and the test organisms around it, facilitating a different comparative analysis but retaining the core principles of the Stokes approach.

The disk diffusion method, epitomized by the Kirby-Bauer and Stokes protocols, remains an indispensable tool in the field of microbiology for the determination of bacterial susceptibility to antibiotics. By combining rigorous standardization with straightforward procedures, these methods enable healthcare professionals to make informed decisions about antimicrobial therapy, thus playing a crucial role in combating the global threat of antimicrobial resistance.

Comparative Analysis: Kirby-Bauer versus Stokes Disk Diffusion Methods

The Kirby-Bauer and Stokes disk diffusion methods represent two pivotal approaches within antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST), each with its distinctive advantages, limitations, and contexts of applicability. This comparative analysis seeks to elucidate the nuances between these methods, providing insights into their operational dynamics, and highlighting the challenges inherent to the disk diffusion technique at large. Through this examination, we aim to offer clarity on the selection of the most appropriate method based on specific clinical and research requirements.^14-17

A Comparative Overview

• Kirby-Bauer Method: The Kirby-Bauer disk diffusion method, standardized by the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI), is lauded for its robustness, reproducibility, and widespread acceptance in global clinical microbiology settings. Its primary advantages include a standardized procedure that allows for comparability across laboratories, the availability of extensive interpretive criteria based on CLSI guidelines, and its applicability to a broad range of bacteria. However, the Kirby-Bauer method is not without limitations. Its reliance on CLSI interpretive criteria means it may not be as flexible in adapting to local resistance patterns or emerging pathogens without updated guidelines. Additionally, the method's accuracy can be affected by variations in laboratory conditions, such as medium thickness, incubation atmosphere, and antibiotic disk potency.

• Stokes Method: The Stokes disk diffusion method offers a comparative approach by analyzing the test organism's zone of inhibition against that of a known control. This method's advantages include the ability to directly compare the test organism's susceptibility with the control, potentially offering more nuanced insights into relative antibiotic effectiveness. The Stokes method, however, may be subject to variability in results due to the subjective nature of comparing zone sizes and the potential for human error in measurement. Furthermore, its utility may be limited by the availability and selection of appropriate control strains, which may not always represent the spectrum of resistance mechanisms present in clinical isolates.

Challenges and Limitations of Disk Diffusion Methods

Both Kirby-Bauer and Stokes methods share common challenges inherent to the disk diffusion technique. One significant limitation is the method's unsuitability for testing slow-growing bacteria, such as Mycobacterium tuberculosis, where the slow growth rate can lead to delayed or inaccurate results. Additionally, certain antibiotics do not diffuse well in agar, potentially leading to misleading interpretations of susceptibility.^17,18

Another challenge is the potential for inaccuracies in interpreting the zones of inhibition. Factors such as the precise measurement of the zone diameters, the subjective assessment of partial zones, and the variability in agar depth can all influence the outcome of the test. Moreover, the disk diffusion method provides qualitative or semi-quantitative results, which may not be as precise as those obtained from broth or agar dilution methods that directly measure the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC).^18,19

The choice between the Kirby-Bauer and Stokes methods should be informed by the specific needs of the clinical or research setting, taking into account factors such as the organism being tested, the antibiotics of interest, and the laboratory's capacity to adhere to standardized procedures. Despite their limitations, disk diffusion methods remain invaluable tools in the global effort to monitor and manage antimicrobial resistance. Addressing the challenges associated with these methods requires ongoing research, standardization efforts, and the development of innovative approaches to enhance their accuracy and applicability. As the battle against antimicrobial resistance intensifies, the evolution of AST methodologies will be critical in ensuring the effective treatment of infectious diseases and the preservation of antibiotic efficacy for future generations.^17-19

Advancements and Future Perspectives in Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing

The relentless evolution of antimicrobial resistance necessitates equally dynamic advancements in antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) methodologies. The disk diffusion methods, while foundational, are undergoing transformative changes driven by technological innovations. These advancements aim to enhance the accuracy, reliability, and efficiency of AST, ensuring it remains a cornerstone in the management of infectious diseases. This section explores recent technological improvements in disk diffusion methods and speculates on the future trajectory of AST, highlighting the role of automation and artificial intelligence (AI) in revolutionizing the field.^3-7

Technological Advancements in Disk Diffusion Methods

Recent years have witnessed significant technological enhancements designed to overcome the inherent limitations of traditional disk diffusion methods. These include:^19-21

• Automated Zone Reading: Advanced imaging systems and software are now capable of automatically measuring zones of inhibition with high precision, reducing human error and variability in interpretations. These systems utilize digital photography and sophisticated algorithms to analyze the zones, ensuring consistent and objective results.

• Enhanced Media: The development of novel agar formulations and additives has improved the growth conditions for fastidious pathogens, expanding the applicability of disk diffusion methods to a broader range of bacteria, including those that are slow-growing.

• Real-time Monitoring: Innovations in real-time monitoring of bacterial growth and antibiotic activity within the disk diffusion assay offer the potential for more dynamic and informative susceptibility testing. These systems can track the inhibition zone formation over time, providing insights into the kinetics of bacterial growth inhibition.

Future of AST: Rapid, Automated Systems and Artificial Intelligence

The future of AST is poised for a paradigm shift, with rapid, automated systems and the integration of artificial intelligence poised to redefine the landscape of infectious disease management.^22-25

• Rapid, Automated AST Systems: The development of fully automated AST systems promises to significantly reduce the time from sample collection to susceptibility results. These systems integrate automated inoculation, disk application, incubation, and zone reading, delivering results in a fraction of the current processing time. Such advancements are crucial for timely and effective clinical decision-making, especially in critical care settings.

• Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning: AI and machine learning (ML) are set to revolutionize AST by enhancing the predictive accuracy of susceptibility testing. By analyzing vast datasets of historical AST results, AI algorithms can identify patterns and predict susceptibility outcomes with high precision. Moreover, AI can assist in the interpretation of complex testing scenarios, such as the detection of novel resistance mechanisms or the prediction of susceptibility in the absence of established clinical breakpoints.

• Integration with Genomic Data: The fusion of AST with bacterial genomics and bioinformatics offers a powerful approach to understanding and predicting antimicrobial resistance. AI-driven platforms can analyze genomic data to predict resistance phenotypes, offering a rapid and comprehensive assessment of an organism's susceptibility profile.

As we navigate the complexities of antimicrobial resistance, the advancements in AST, particularly in the context of disk diffusion methods, underscore a proactive and innovative response to a global health threat. The integration of automation, artificial intelligence, and genomic data into AST practices promises not only to enhance the accuracy and efficiency of testing but also to usher in a new era of precision medicine in infectious diseases. The future of AST lies in harnessing these technological advancements to deliver faster, more accurate, and predictive susceptibility testing, ultimately improving patient outcomes and combating the spread of resistance.

In conclusion, the disk diffusion method remains a vital tool in antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST), offering a simple, cost-effective means to guide clinical decisions and inform epidemiological surveillance in the ongoing battle against antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Despite its inherent limitations, including challenges with slow-growing bacteria and interpretative complexities, technological advancements and methodological innovations promise to enhance its accuracy and reliability. The integration of automated systems and artificial intelligence heralds a new era of precision in AST, underscoring the necessity for continuous improvement and adaptation of these methods. As AMR evolves, so too must our strategies for its detection and management, emphasizing a concerted call to action for the global health community to invest in the development of advanced AST techniques. This commitment is crucial not only for safeguarding the efficacy of existing antibiotics but also for ensuring the optimal treatment of infectious diseases, thereby preserving public health in the face of an ever-changing microbial landscape.

1. Prestinaci, Francesca, Paola Pezzotti, and Alessandra Pantosti. "Antimicrobial Resistance: A Global Multifaceted Phenomenon." Pathogens and Global Health, vol. 109, no. 7, 2015, pp. 309-318. DOI: 10.1179/2047773215Y.0000000030.

2. Tang, K. W. K., B. C. Millar, and J. E. Moore. "Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR)." British Journal of Biomedical Science, 28 June 2023, vol. 80, no. 1, 2023, p. 11387. DOI: 10.1080/09674845.2023.2219465.

3. Gajic, Ivana, et al. "Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing: A Comprehensive Review of Currently Used Methods." Antibiotics, vol. 11, no. 4, 2022, pp. 427. DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics11040427.

4. Vasala, A., V. P. Hytönen, and O. H. Laitinen. "Modern Tools for Rapid Diagnostics of Antimicrobial Resistance." Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology, vol. 10, 2020, p. 308. DOI: 10.3389/fcimb.2020.00308.

5. Khan, Z. A., M. F. Siddiqui, and S. Park. "Current and Emerging Methods of Antibiotic Susceptibility Testing." Diagnostics, vol. 9, no. 2, 2019, p. 49. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics9020049.

6. Salam, M. A., M. Y. Al-Amin, J. S. Pawar, N. Akhter, and I. B. Lucy. "Conventional Methods and Future Trends in Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing." Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences, vol. 30, no. 3, Mar. 2023, p. 103582. DOI: 10.1016/j.sjbs.2023.103582.

7. Balouiri, M., M. Sadiki, and S. K. Ibnsouda. "Methods for In Vitro Evaluating Antimicrobial Activity: A Review." Journal of Pharmaceutical Analysis, vol. 6, no. 2, Apr. 2016, pp. 71-79. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpha.2015.11.005.

8. Vasala, A., V. P. Hytönen, and O. H. Laitinen. "Modern Tools for Rapid Diagnostics of Antimicrobial Resistance." Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology, vol. 10, 2020, p. 308. DOI: 10.3389/fcimb.2020.00308.

9. Kowalska-Krochmal, B., and R. Dudek-Wicher. "The Minimum Inhibitory Concentration of Antibiotics: Methods, Interpretation, Clinical Relevance." Pathogens, vol. 10, no. 2, 2021, p. 165. DOI: 10.3390/pathogens10020165.

10. Poliak, M. S., and I. A. Tsvetkova. "[Some Factors Influencing the Efficiency of Disk-Diffusion Test to Determine the Antibiotic Sensitivity of Microorganisms]." Klinicheskaya Laboratornaya Diagnostika, vol. 5, May 2007, pp. 36-39. PMID: 17580672.

11. Nassar, M. S. M., W. A. Hazzah, and W. M. K. Bakr. "Evaluation of Antibiotic Susceptibility Test Results: How Guilty a Laboratory Could Be?" Journal of the Egyptian Public Health Association, vol. 94, no. 1, 2019, p. 4. DOI: 10.1186/s42506-019-0006-7.

12. Khalili, H., R. Soltani, S. Negahban, A. Abdollahi, and K. Gholami. "Reliability of Disk Diffusion Test Results for the Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing of Nosocomial Gram-Positive Microorganisms: Is E-Test Method Better?" Iranian Journal of Pharmaceutical Research, vol. 11, no. 2, Spring 2012, pp. 559-563. DOI: 10.22037/ijpr.2012.597.

13. Mercer, D. K., M. D. Torres, S. S. Duay, et al. "Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing of Antimicrobial Peptides to Better Predict Efficacy." Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology, vol. 10, 2020, p. 326. DOI: 10.3389/fcimb.2020.00326.

14. Biswas, J., K. P. Appasami, H. Gautam, et al. "Tick-Tock, Beat the Clock: Comparative Analysis of Disc Diffusion Testing with 6-, 10-, and 24-h Growth for Accelerated Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing and Antimicrobial Stewardship." European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, vol. 42, no. 8, Aug. 2023, pp. 929-943. DOI: 10.1007/s10096-023-04987-1.

15. "Stokes Disc Diffusion Method." Microbe Online, 27 Feb. 2024, www.microbeonline.com/stokes-disc-diffusion-method-principle-procedure-interpretation-results/. Accessed 27 Feb. 2024.

16. Coorevits, L., J. Boelens, and G. Claeys. "Direct Susceptibility Testing by Disk Diffusion on Clinical Samples: A Rapid and Accurate Tool for Antibiotic Stewardship." European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, vol. 34, no. 6, June 2015, pp. 1207-1212. DOI: 10.1007/s10096-015-2382-1.

17. Baranova, A. A., A. P. Tyurin, V. A. Korshun, and V. A. Alferova. "Sensing of Antibiotic–Bacteria Interactions." Antibiotics, vol. 12, no. 8, 2023, p. 1340. DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics12081340.

18. Feng, J., R. Yee, S. Zhang, L. Tian, W. Shi, W. H. Zhang, and Y. Zhang. "A Rapid Growth-Independent Antibiotic Resistance Detection Test by SYBR Green/Propidium Iodide Viability Assay." Frontiers in Medicine, vol. 5, 3 May 2018, p. 127. DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2018.00127.

19. Gautam, V., L. Singhal, S. Arora, C. Jha, and P. Ray. "Reliability of Kirby-Bauer Disk Diffusion Method for Detecting Carbapenem Resistance in Acinetobacter baumannii-calcoaceticus Complex Isolates." Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, vol. 57, no. 4, Apr. 2013, pp. 2003-2004. DOI: 10.1128/AAC.01943-12.

20. Berlanda, S. F., M. Breitfeld, C. L. Dietsche, and P. S. Dittrich. "Recent Advances in Microfluidic Technology for Bioanalysis and Diagnostics." Analytical Chemistry, vol. 93, no. 1, 2021, pp. 311-331. DOI: 10.1021/acs.analchem.0c04871.

21. Yamin, D., V. Uskoković, A. M. Wakil, et al. "Current and Future Technologies for the Detection of Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria." Diagnostics, vol. 13, no. 20, 18 Oct. 2023, p. 3246. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics13203246.

22. Li, Y., X. Yang, and W. Zhao. "Emerging Microtechnologies and Automated Systems for Rapid Bacterial Identification and Antibiotic Susceptibility Testing." SLAS Technology, vol. 22, no. 6, Dec. 2017, pp. 585-608. DOI: 10.1177/2472630317738755.

23. Wang, Jiao, Vivek Chavda, Riddhi Prajapati, et al. "An Amalgamation of Bioinformatics and Artificial Intelligence for COVID-19 Management: From Discovery to Clinic." Current Research in Biotechnology, vol. 6, 2023, p. 100159. DOI: 10.1016/j.crbiot.2023.100159.

24. Harris, M. "Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence for Pathogen Identification and Antibiotic Resistance Detection: Advancing Diagnostics for Urinary Tract Infections." BioMed, vol. 3, no. 2, 2023, pp. 246-255. DOI: 10.3390/biomed3020017.

25. Sirkeck, Assem, Vineet Bhardwaj, and Kamal Kant Kalia. "Antimicrobial Sensitivity Testing: Its Importance, Types, Methods and Interpretations." International Academic Research Journal of Clinical Research, vol. 2, no. 4, 2022, pp. 5-12. DOI: 10.46654/iarjcr.2022.v02i04.002.