Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Disk diffusion test

The disk diffusion test, commonly known as the Kirby-Bauer method, is a standardized microbiological technique used to assess the antimicrobial susceptibility of bacteria by measuring the diameter of inhibition zones formed around antibiotic-impregnated paper disks placed on an inoculated agar plate, where larger zones indicate greater bacterial sensitivity to the antibiotic.^[1] This qualitative method, which relies on the diffusion of antibiotics through Mueller-Hinton agar and the inhibition of bacterial growth, categorizes results as susceptible, intermediate, or resistant based on predefined breakpoints to guide clinical treatment decisions for bacterial infections.^[2] Developed in the mid-1950s through experiments by William M. Kirby and A.W. Bauer, the test evolved from earlier diffusion-based assays and was standardized in 1966 by the World Health Organization as the gold standard for routine antimicrobial susceptibility testing in laboratories.^[3] Its procedure involves preparing a bacterial suspension matching a 0.5 McFarland turbidity standard, evenly inoculating the agar surface, applying standardized antibiotic disks (typically 6 mm in diameter), and incubating at 35°C for 16–18 hours before measuring clear zones of inhibited growth with calipers.^[1] Standardization is maintained by organizations such as the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) in the United States and the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST), which provide detailed guidelines on media, disk potencies, incubation conditions, and interpretive criteria to ensure reproducibility and accuracy across global labs.^[4] Widely adopted for its simplicity, low cost, and applicability to aerobic and facultative anaerobic bacteria, the disk diffusion test remains a cornerstone of clinical microbiology despite limitations such as its unsuitability for fastidious organisms, anaerobic bacteria, or certain antibiotics requiring extended incubation.^[1] Quality control is essential, involving periodic testing of reference strains to verify zone sizes within established ranges, thereby minimizing errors from variables like agar depth, pH, or inoculum density.^[5] In modern practice, it supports antimicrobial stewardship by identifying resistance patterns, though it is often complemented by quantitative methods like broth microdilution for precise minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) values.^[3]

Fundamentals

Historical Development

The disk diffusion test originated in the late 19th century as an agar diffusion technique employed by Dutch microbiologist Martinus Beijerinck, who developed auxanography in 1889 to investigate the effects of diffusible nutrients on bacterial growth, providing an early framework for assessing diffusible biological agents in solid media.^[6] This foundational approach was later adapted for antimicrobial applications following the discovery of penicillin in the 1920s and the urgent need for susceptibility testing during World War II. In the 1940s, refinements focused on antibiotic quantification; notably, J.G. Vincent and H.W. Vincent introduced a filter paper disc modification of the Oxford cup method in 1944, replacing glass cups with impregnated paper discs to measure penicillin diffusion and inhibition zones more practically. Throughout the 1940s and 1950s, the method evolved through contributions from researchers like Norman Heatley, who developed the cylinder-plate assay for penicillin, and others such as J.C. Gould and J.H. Bowie, who introduced the multiple disk diffusion technique in 1952 to evaluate bacterial susceptibility to emerging antibiotics.^[7] Standardization efforts culminated in 1966 when A.W. Bauer, W.M.M. Kirby, J.C. Sherris, and M. Turck published the Kirby-Bauer method, a reproducible single-disc protocol using Mueller-Hinton agar, which became the benchmark for clinical laboratories. The World Health Organization facilitated its global adoption through an international collaborative study completed in 1961, confirming its reliability for routine testing.^[8] Post-1960s developments emphasized harmonization and quality assurance. In 1972, the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS, now the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute or CLSI) issued its inaugural performance standards for antimicrobial disc susceptibility tests, establishing zone interpretative criteria and quality control parameters.^[9] The World Health Organization further supported dissemination in the 1970s via training programs in developing regions to combat rising antimicrobial resistance. In 1997, the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) was established to unify European guidelines, developing a calibrated disk diffusion method aligned with minimum inhibitory concentration breakpoints.^[10] Key milestones include the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's recognition of standardized disk tests in 1981 for regulatory compliance, and EUCAST's ongoing updates, including the Disk Diffusion Manual v12.0 (2024) and Reading Guide v11.0 (2025), incorporating refined zone diameters for contemporary antibiotics.^[11]^[2]

Underlying Principles

The disk diffusion test relies on agar as a semi-solid nutrient medium that supports bacterial growth while permitting the radial diffusion of antibiotics from commercially impregnated paper disks placed on its surface.^[12] This diffusion occurs in Mueller-Hinton agar, a standardized medium chosen for its low sulfonamide and tetracycline inhibitors, ensuring consistent antibiotic activity and bacterial growth. The semi-solid nature of the agar, with a typical depth of 4 mm (±0.5 mm), facilitates even diffusion without excessive vertical migration of the antibiotic.^[13] Antibiotics released from the disk create a concentration gradient in the agar, with the highest concentration at the disk's center decreasing radially outward; this process follows principles of diffusion described by Fick's laws, where the antibiotic concentration at a given distance is inversely proportional to the square root of time during incubation.^[14] Over the standard 16-18 hour incubation period at 35°C, the antibiotic molecules move through the agar matrix, establishing a logarithmic decline in concentration away from the disk.^[12] Smaller, more soluble antibiotic molecules exhibit faster diffusion rates compared to larger or less soluble ones, influencing the gradient's steepness.^[14] Inhibition zones form as clear, circular areas of suppressed bacterial growth surrounding the disk, where the local antibiotic concentration exceeds the bacterium's minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC), preventing replication while allowing growth elsewhere on the plate.^[12] The diameter of these zones inversely correlates with the MIC: larger zones indicate higher susceptibility (lower MIC), as the antibiotic diffuses farther before reaching sub-inhibitory levels.^[14] Zone size is modulated by several factors, including agar depth—shallower depths (e.g., below 4 mm) enhance diffusion and enlarge zones, while thicker layers impede it—and medium pH, standardized at 7.2-7.4 to optimize antibiotic stability and activity without altering diffusion coefficients significantly.^[13] This correlation between zone size and susceptibility holds for most hydrophilic antibiotics but has exceptions for hydrophobic agents, such as certain macrolides or polymyxins, which diffuse poorly in aqueous agar and may produce smaller or irregular zones despite clinical efficacy.^[14]

Standard Procedure

Materials Preparation

The standard medium for the Kirby-Bauer disk diffusion test is Mueller-Hinton agar (MHA), prepared from a dehydrated base consisting of beef heart infusion, casein hydrolysate, and starch, with an agar concentration of 1.5-2% to ensure proper solidity and diffusion properties.^[15] The medium is autoclaved, cooled to approximately 50°C, and poured into Petri dishes to a depth of 4 mm, which corresponds to a volume of about 25 mL per 100 mm plate, to standardize the agar layer for consistent antibiotic diffusion.^[1] The pH is adjusted to 7.2-7.4 at room temperature prior to sterilization to maintain physiological conditions that support bacterial growth without influencing antimicrobial activity.^[16] The bacterial inoculum is prepared from a pure overnight culture grown on a non-selective medium such as tryptic soy agar or blood agar at 35-37°C, emulsified in sterile saline to create a turbid suspension.^[1] This suspension is standardized to a 0.5 McFarland turbidity standard, equivalent to approximately 1.5 × 10^8 colony-forming units (CFU) per milliliter, using either a visual comparator against a barium chloride-sulfuric acid reference or a spectrophotometer measuring optical density at 625 nm (0.08-0.13).^[17] Preparation must occur within 15 minutes of adjustment to prevent settling or overgrowth, ensuring uniform lawn formation on the agar surface.^[18] Antibiotic-impregnated paper disks, typically 6 mm in diameter and made from absorbent material, are commercially prepared with precise quantities of antimicrobial agents as specified by CLSI and EUCAST guidelines to ensure reproducibility across tests.^[19] For example, ampicillin disks contain 10 μg of the antibiotic, while other agents like gentamicin use 10 μg or ciprofloxacin 5 μg, with potencies verified against control strains to confirm diffusion rates.^[20] Disks are stored desiccated at 2-8°C or frozen at -20°C for longer-term stability, and potency is checked periodically using quality control organisms. For fastidious organisms such as Streptococcus species, including Streptococcus pneumoniae, Mueller-Hinton agar supplemented with 5% defibrinated sheep blood is used to provide essential nutrients and support growth, including hemolytic activity.^[21] This formulation, poured to the same 4 mm depth and pH range as standard MHA, is recommended by CLSI for susceptibility testing of streptococci.^[22] The sheep blood must be fresh and defibrinated to avoid clotting. For Haemophilus influenzae, Mueller-Hinton agar supplemented with 5% chocolate (heated blood) or with hemin (X factor) and 20 mg/L β-NAD (V factor) is used.

Inoculation and Incubation

The inoculation step begins with the application of a standardized bacterial suspension to the surface of the Mueller-Hinton agar plate to create a uniform lawn. A sterile cotton swab is dipped into the inoculum suspension, adjusted to a 0.5 McFarland standard (approximately 1–2 × 10⁸ CFU/mL), with excess fluid removed by pressing and rotating the swab against the inner wall of the tube. The swab is then streaked across the agar surface in three directions, rotating the plate 60° between each pass, to ensure even distribution; the edges of the plate are rimmed to spread any remaining moisture. The inoculated plate is allowed to dry at room temperature for 3–15 minutes before proceeding, promoting adhesion and uniformity without altering the inoculum density.^[4] Antimicrobial-impregnated disks are placed on the dried agar surface within 15 minutes of inoculation to allow diffusion to begin promptly and consistently. Disks are placed on 90-150 mm plates, with a maximum of 6 on 90/100 mm plates and 12 on 150 mm plates, positioned at least 15-20 mm from the plate edge and at least 24 mm apart from each other (center-to-center) to prevent zone overlap. Each disk is gently pressed with forceps to ensure full contact with the agar, but not embedded, as excessive force can distort diffusion patterns. This spacing and timing are critical for reproducible zone formation, as delays or crowding can lead to inaccurate results. Following disk placement, the plates are inverted to prevent condensation from dripping onto the agar and incubated under aerobic conditions at 35–37°C for 16–18 hours, unless otherwise specified for certain organisms. Standard incubation occurs in ambient air without supplemental CO₂ for most non-fastidious bacteria; however, for fastidious species like Haemophilus influenzae, incubation in 5% CO₂ may be required to support growth. Plates must remain undisturbed during this period to allow antibiotic diffusion and bacterial inhibition zones to develop fully, with early reading generally discouraged for routine testing to ensure reliable susceptibility categorization. Extended incubation (up to 20 hours) may apply in some protocols, but full duration is essential for standard results.^[4]

Zone Measurement and Interpretation

After incubation, the zones of inhibition are measured using a ruler or calipers to determine the total diameter in millimeters, including the diameter of the antibiotic disk itself, which is typically 6 mm. Measurements are taken from the back of the Petri dish under reflected light, viewing the plate a few inches above a non-reflecting black surface to ensure accurate assessment of the clear zone where no bacterial growth is visible. Only the clear, distinct zone is considered, ignoring any haze, film, or slight growth (up to 20% of the lawn density in some cases, such as with trimethoprim/sulfonamides) within or at the edges of the zone. Fuzzy or indistinct edges, often appearing as a gradual reduction in growth density, may indicate intermediate susceptibility and require careful evaluation of the zone margin as the area with no obvious growth, without using magnification. The measured zone diameters are then interpreted by comparing them to standardized breakpoints established by organizations such as the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) or the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST), which categorize bacterial susceptibility into susceptible (S), intermediate (I), or resistant (R) based on clinical outcomes, pharmacokinetics, and microbiological data. For example, in the case of Escherichia coli tested against ampicillin (10 μg disk), a zone diameter of ≥17 mm indicates susceptible, 14-16 mm indicates intermediate, and ≤13 mm indicates resistant.^[23] These categories guide therapeutic decisions, with susceptible implying the antibiotic is likely effective at standard doses, intermediate suggesting potential efficacy with higher doses or specific site considerations, and resistant indicating ineffectiveness.

Quality Control and Standardization

Quality Control Procedures

Quality control procedures in the disk diffusion test are essential to verify the reliability of materials, techniques, and environmental conditions, ensuring accurate antimicrobial susceptibility results. These procedures involve routine testing of reference strains to confirm that zone diameters fall within established acceptable limits, thereby validating the performance of each test batch. Control strains, typically obtained from the American Type Culture Collection (ATCC), are used for quality control. For most antibiotics, Escherichia coli ATCC 25922 serves as the primary reference strain, while Staphylococcus aureus ATCC 25923 is recommended for β-lactam antibiotics to assess specific drug-class performance. Additional strains, such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa ATCC 27853, may be included for antibiotics targeting Gram-negative non-fermenters. These strains are selected for their consistent and predictable susceptibility patterns, allowing laboratories to monitor test reproducibility.^[24]^[2] Acceptable zone diameter ranges for these control strains are defined by standards organizations like the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) and the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST). For example, with E. coli ATCC 25922 tested against gentamicin (10 μg disk), zones must measure between 16 and 21 mm to be considered valid under CLSI guidelines.^[25] Deviations outside these ranges indicate potential issues, such as suboptimal disk potency, media inconsistencies, or incubation errors. Procedures require running control strains alongside patient isolates in each test batch, using the same standardized conditions as the main test. Results must be documented meticulously, with any out-of-range zones prompting immediate investigation and corrective actions, such as checking media pH (which should be 7.2–7.4) or replacing expired disks. Troubleshooting may involve retesting with fresh materials or verifying equipment calibration to prevent erroneous clinical interpretations.^[24]^[26] Testing frequency is specified to balance practicality with reliability: at minimum, one set of controls per week, but more frequently—daily if patient testing occurs—for high-volume laboratories. Controls must also be performed with each new batch of media, disks, or inoculating devices to ensure lot-to-lot consistency. This approach aligns with regulatory requirements under CLIA '88, where risk-based individualized quality control plans (IQCP) may adjust frequency based on historical performance data.^[24]^[2]

CLSI and EUCAST Guidelines

The Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI), a US-based organization, develops consensus-driven standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing, with a primary focus on North American clinical laboratories.^[27] Its key document, M100 Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (35th edition, 2025), provides annual updates to disk diffusion breakpoints, incorporating new clinical data, drug approvals, and methodological refinements.^[25] CLSI guidelines emphasize the use of Mueller-Hinton agar as the standard medium and specify disk contents (e.g., 10 μg for ampicillin) to ensure reproducibility in zone diameter measurements.^[25] In contrast, the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST), centered on European laboratories, offers freely accessible guidelines to promote widespread adoption across the continent.^[10] The EUCAST Disk Diffusion Method Manual (version 13.0, January 2025) outlines procedures, including rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing (RAST) options, and integrates pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) principles more prominently in breakpoint derivation, though some PK/PD-specific breakpoints were removed from tables in recent updates.^[2] Like CLSI, EUCAST recommends Mueller-Hinton agar but allows variations in media supplements (e.g., for fastidious organisms) and incubation conditions, such as 20°C for specific drugs like fosfomycin.^[4] Key differences between the two systems include variations in zone diameter breakpoints, where CLSI often provides wider susceptible ranges for certain antibiotics compared to EUCAST's more conservative thresholds based on epidemiological cutoffs and PK/PD data; for example, CLSI susceptible breakpoints for meropenem against Enterobacterales are ≥19 mm, while EUCAST sets them at ≥26 mm for some contexts.^[28] These discrepancies arise from differing interpretive categories—EUCAST redefines "intermediate" as "susceptible, increased exposure" to reflect dose adjustments, whereas CLSI retains it for standard dosing with additional qualifiers like "susceptible, dose-dependent."^[28] Procedural nuances, such as EUCAST's allowance for shorter incubation times in RAST versus CLSI's standardized 16-18 hours at 35°C, further highlight these distinctions.^[29] Harmonization efforts between CLSI and EUCAST have intensified since the 2010s, with joint documents like the 2025 guidance on modifications to susceptibility testing methods aiming to align reference procedures and reduce global variability.^[30] Despite progress, discrepancies persist for approximately 10-20% of pathogen-antimicrobial combinations in disk diffusion testing, particularly for gram-negative bacteria and older agents, necessitating laboratories to select guidelines based on regional standards.^[31]

Alternative Methods

Oxford Penicillin Cup Method

The Oxford Penicillin Cup Method, developed in 1941 by Edward P. Abraham, Ernst Chain, and colleagues at Oxford University under Howard Florey, served as an early adaptation of diffusion-based antibiotic testing tailored for penicillin evaluation during its initial therapeutic development.^[32] This technique emerged from efforts to standardize penicillin assays amid wartime production needs, replacing earlier serial dilution approaches with a more efficient diffusion system using physical reservoirs for the antibiotic.^[33] In the setup, small glass or porcelain cylinders—typically short tubes with an outer diameter of approximately 8 mm, thin walls (1 mm), and beveled edges for sealing against the agar—are employed instead of absorbent paper disks.^[34] These cups are placed equidistantly (usually six per plate) on the surface of a nutrient agar plate uniformly inoculated with the test microorganism, such as Staphylococcus aureus for standard assays.^[35] Each cup is filled with 0.2–0.25 mL of a serial two-fold dilution series of the antibiotic in a suitable buffer, spanning a range of concentrations (e.g., from 0.1 to 10 units/mL for penicillin), allowing diffusion from multiple points on a single plate.^[34] The procedure begins with seeding the agar (e.g., 13 mL of 2% nutrient agar in a Petri dish) with a standardized bacterial suspension, followed by immediate placement and filling of the cups to prevent uneven diffusion.^[34] The plate is incubated at 30–37°C for 12–16 hours, during which the antibiotic diffuses radially, creating concentration gradients that inhibit bacterial growth and form clear zones around each cup.^[32] Zone diameters are then measured to the nearest millimeter using calipers or a template, excluding the cup diameter itself (typically subtracting 8 mm).^[34] To estimate the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC), the measured zone diameters are plotted against the logarithm (base 10) of the corresponding antibiotic concentrations in the cups, producing a linear relationship. This can be modeled by the regression equation:

\text{zone diameter} = a - b \cdot \log_{10}(\text{concentration})

where a is the y-intercept and b is the slope (typically 2–3 mm per log unit for penicillin).^[36] The line is extrapolated to the point where the zone diameter equals zero, and the concentration value at that intercept represents the MIC—the lowest concentration preventing visible growth.^[36] Measurements are ideally performed in triplicate for precision, achieving reproducibility within ±15–25%.^[32] A key advantage of this method is its ability to approximate quantitative MIC values from a single agar plate using multiple concentrations, reducing the need for numerous separate dilution tests and enabling efficient screening during penicillin's early scarcity.^[33] It facilitated rapid potency assessments and susceptibility evaluations in the 1940s, influencing later standardized diffusion techniques despite limitations in automation.^[32]

EUCAST Rapid AST (RAST)

The EUCAST Rapid Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (RAST) is a disk diffusion method designed to accelerate antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) by inoculating plates directly from positive blood culture bottles, enabling preliminary results as early as 4-8 hours after incubation onset. This approach addresses the time lag in traditional workflows, where subculturing from blood cultures followed by standard disk diffusion requires approximately 48 hours total for results. In RAST, 100-150 μL of untreated broth from a positive blood culture bottle—typically flagged after 4-6 hours of microbial growth—is spread evenly onto Mueller-Hinton (MH) agar plates, or MH Fastidious (MHF) agar for fastidious organisms, using a sterile swab; antibiotic disks are then applied, and plates are incubated at 35±1°C in ambient air for reading at specified intervals.^[37]^[38] The procedure incorporates supplements such as 5% defibrinated horse blood or 10 μg/mL NAD for fastidious species, ensuring reliable growth and zone formation despite the lower inoculum compared to standard methods (approximately 10^5 CFU/mL vs. 10^8 CFU/mL). Incubation totals 16-20 hours for comprehensive results, with zones measured at 4, 6, 8, and/or 16-20 hours (±5 minutes for early reads) using transmitted light and a ruler; inhibition zones are interpreted using species-, time-, and drug-specific RAST breakpoints, which are adjusted downward to account for the reduced inoculum and shorter incubation, often including an "Area of Technical Uncertainty" (ATU) for zones falling between susceptible and resistant categories. Advantages include significantly faster reporting—18-20 hours total from blood culture positivity versus 48 hours for conventional subculture-based disk diffusion—facilitating earlier targeted therapy for bloodstream infections and reducing empirical broad-spectrum antibiotic use.^[39]^[40]^[38] RAST also supports rapid screening for resistance mechanisms in Enterobacterales, such as extended-spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBLs) and carbapenemases, using dedicated cut-off zone diameters at 4-6 hours post-inoculation. For instance, ESBL detection in Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae employs cefpodoxime disks with and without clavulanate, where a ≥5 mm difference in zone diameters indicates ESBL production; similarly, carbapenemase screening uses meropenem or imipenem disks, with zones ≤12 mm signaling potential carbapenemase activity, validated for epidemiological and clinical alerting without confirmatory testing at this stage. These screens are limited to specific Enterobacterales like E. coli, K. pneumoniae, and Salmonella enterica, enhancing outbreak detection and resistance surveillance.^[41]^[42] In 2024, EUCAST updated RAST guidelines, expanding validation to additional species within Enterobacterales and staphylococci, and incorporating breakpoints for up to 20 antibiotics, including beta-lactams, aminoglycosides, and fluoroquinolones. A further update in March 2025 added information on screening and characterizing benzylpenicillin resistance in Streptococcus pneumoniae, along with revised correlation files and implementation guidance, as reflected in Breakpoint Table v8.1 (valid as of July 2025) and methodology version 6.0.^[43]^[44]^[40]

Disk Pre-Diffusion Method

The disk pre-diffusion method is a modified disk diffusion technique designed to evaluate the synergistic activity of beta-lactam antibiotics combined with beta-lactamase inhibitors, particularly against multidrug-resistant bacteria producing metallo-beta-lactamases (MBLs). This approach addresses limitations in standard disk diffusion by allowing the inhibitor to diffuse into the agar prior to the addition of the partner antibiotic, enabling more accurate assessment of combination efficacy where direct co-application might not reflect true interactions. It has become relevant with the emergence of novel inhibitors like avibactam, which restore susceptibility in isolates resistant due to enzymes such as NDM, VIM, or IMP.^[45] The procedure involves pre-incubating a disk containing the beta-lactamase inhibitor—such as a ceftazidime-avibactam (CZA) disk (30 μg/20 μg)—on an uninoculated Mueller-Hinton agar plate at 35 ± 2°C for 1 hour to allow diffusion of the inhibitor. The disk is then removed, the plate is inoculated with a 0.5 McFarland suspension of the test organism, and an aztreonam (ATM) disk (30 μg) is placed at the same site. The plate is incubated overnight at 35 ± 2°C, after which the zone of inhibition is measured according to CLSI guidelines. This sequential diffusion mimics the protective role of the inhibitor against enzymatic degradation of the antibiotic during testing.^[45] This method is primarily applied to test combinations like ceftazidime-avibactam with aztreonam against MBL-producing Enterobacterales, where aztreonam alone is ineffective due to co-produced serine beta-lactamases, but avibactam inhibits those enzymes, restoring aztreonam's activity against MBLs. For instance, in studies with NDM-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae, the technique has predicted in vitro activity with high correlation to broth microdilution minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs ≤1 mg/L), supporting its use in guiding therapy for infections like bacteremia or pneumonia caused by carbapenem-resistant organisms.^[45]^[46] Interpretation relies on zone diameter measurements, where zones ≥21 mm indicate susceptibility to the combination per CLSI breakpoints for aztreonam. Synergy is assessed by comparing the combination zone to that of aztreonam alone; an increase >5 mm suggests restoration of susceptibility and potential clinical efficacy, with categorical agreement exceeding 95% in validations against reference methods. Enhanced zones of 4–9 mm were observed in a subset of isolates, while larger increases (>10 mm) correlated with stronger synergy.^[45] The method was introduced in the 2010s alongside novel diazabicyclooctane inhibitors like avibactam, with early adaptations for combination testing appearing around 2015 following its FDA approval in ceftazidime-avibactam. It gained validation through studies in 2022, demonstrating 100% essential agreement with Etest and broth microdilution for MBL producers across 60 isolates, confirming its reliability for routine laboratory use without requiring specialized equipment.^[45]^[46]

Antifungal Testing

The disk diffusion method for antifungal susceptibility testing adapts the standard procedure to evaluate the response of yeasts and molds to antifungal agents, providing a simple screening tool for clinical isolates, particularly Candida species. This approach follows standardized guidelines such as CLSI M44 (2018), which specify the use of RPMI 1640 agar supplemented with 2% glucose and buffered to pH 7.0 to support fungal growth while mimicking physiological conditions.^[47] The inoculum is prepared to a density of 0.5-1 × 10^6 CFU/mL, typically by direct suspension of fresh colonies in saline and adjustment to a 0.5 McFarland turbidity standard, ensuring uniform lawn formation on the agar plate.^[47] Antifungal-impregnated disks, such as those containing 100 μg of amphotericin B or 25 μg of fluconazole, are placed on the inoculated surface, allowing diffusion and interaction with the fungal cells during incubation at 35°C for 24-48 hours.^[47] Interpretation of results relies on measuring the diameter of inhibition zones around the disks and comparing them to established breakpoints, which categorize isolates as susceptible (S), susceptible dose-dependent (SDD), or resistant (R). For example, under CLSI M44 guidelines, a zone diameter of ≥19 mm for fluconazole indicates susceptibility in Candida albicans, guiding initial therapeutic decisions for infections like candidemia.^[47] These breakpoints are derived from correlations with broth microdilution reference methods and clinical outcome data, emphasizing the method's role in rapid categorization rather than precise minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) determination.^[48] Despite its utility, antifungal disk diffusion testing is less standardized than its bacterial counterpart, with limitations including variability in zone reading due to fungal morphology and limited validation for molds beyond preliminary screening. It is primarily recommended as an initial assessment before confirmatory broth microdilution, particularly for azoles and polyenes in yeast isolates, to avoid over-reliance on qualitative results in complex infections.^[49]

Bioautography

Bioautography represents a specialized adaptation of the disk diffusion test that integrates thin-layer chromatography (TLC) separation with biological detection to identify antimicrobial activity in complex mixtures, such as plant extracts. In this method, crude samples are spotted onto a TLC plate, typically silica gel, and developed using a suitable solvent system to separate individual compounds based on their retention factors (Rf values). The plate is then subjected to a bioassay where the separated compounds interact with a test microorganism, allowing for the localization of active antimicrobial spots without prior isolation.^[50] The procedure involves developing the TLC plate with the sample extract, drying it, and then overlaying it with a thin layer of molten agar seeded with the target microorganism, such as Staphylococcus aureus or Bacillus subtilis, at concentrations around 10^6 CFU/mL. The assembly is incubated at 37°C for 16-24 hours, during which antimicrobial compounds diffuse from the TLC spots into the agar, inhibiting microbial growth and forming visible zones of inhibition analogous to those in standard disk diffusion. For enhanced sensitivity, the TLC plate may instead be directly exposed to the microbial suspension via spraying or dipping, followed by incubation in a humidified chamber to facilitate diffusion and growth. Rf values of active spots, calculated as the distance traveled by the compound divided by the solvent front distance (e.g., Rf 0.54 for thymol), enable precise identification and subsequent isolation of bioactive components.^[50]^[51]^[52] Two primary types of bioautography are employed: contact bioautography, which uses direct overlay of the TLC plate onto the seeded agar for compound diffusion, and direct bioautography, which involves vapor or liquid exposure of the microbial suspension to the plate, often in a closed chamber to promote even distribution and higher resolution of inhibition zones. Contact methods are simpler but may suffer from lower sensitivity due to limited diffusion, while direct approaches, including vapor diffusion variants, offer improved detection of weakly active compounds by allowing microorganisms to grow directly on the plate surface.^[50]^[52] This technique finds extensive application in natural product screening, particularly for evaluating plant extracts like those from Thymus vulgaris or Melastoma malabathricum, where it rapidly pinpoints antimicrobial hotspots amid complex matrices, facilitating targeted purification of leads for drug discovery. Visualization of inhibition zones can be achieved directly under UV light at 254 nm or 365 nm for fluorescent compounds, or through staining with tetrazolium chloride (TTC) or 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT), where viable cells reduce the dye to a purple formazan, leaving white or pale inhibition zones against the colored background after 3-4 hours of additional incubation at 37°C. For overlay methods, clear white zones appear on the agar overlay, while MTT staining in direct bioautography highlights live/dead distinctions, with MTT formazan reduction confirming antimicrobial efficacy.^[50]^[51]^[52]

Applications and Limitations

Clinical and Research Applications

In clinical settings, the disk diffusion test serves as a cornerstone for antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST), enabling laboratories to guide antibiotic selection for treating bacterial infections such as urinary tract infections (UTIs) and pneumonia by identifying effective agents against patient isolates.^[53] This method is particularly valuable in resource-limited environments due to its simplicity and cost-effectiveness, allowing rapid categorization of pathogens as susceptible, intermediate, or resistant to guide targeted therapy.^[12] For instance, direct disk diffusion from positive blood cultures can yield results up to 24 hours faster than conventional methods, facilitating earlier appropriate antibiotic use in sepsis cases.^[54] The test also plays a key role in epidemiological surveillance of antimicrobial resistance, where standardized disk diffusion results help track resistance patterns across populations and inform public health strategies.^[55] In antifungal applications, it supports management of candidemia by assessing susceptibility to agents like fluconazole, with studies showing that disk diffusion testing enables de-escalation from broad-spectrum therapy in susceptible Candida isolates, reducing unnecessary exposure to potentially toxic drugs.^[56] Disk diffusion is the most widely used AST method globally in microbiology laboratories, applied routinely for both bacterial and yeast pathogens.^[12] In research, the disk diffusion test is employed to screen novel antimicrobials for initial activity against bacterial strains, providing a quick and economical preliminary assessment before more resource-intensive methods like minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) determination.^[57] It is also used to validate correlations between zone diameters and MIC values for new agents, ensuring reliable interpretive criteria for clinical translation.^[58] In drug discovery pipelines, the method facilitates high-throughput evaluation of compound libraries, identifying leads with broad-spectrum potential.^[59] By informing precise antibiotic prescribing, the disk diffusion test contributes to antimicrobial stewardship programs, reducing inappropriate therapy and combating resistance; integration with stewardship has been shown to shorten time to optimal treatment and decrease misuse in gram-negative bacteremia.^[60]

Limitations and Considerations

The disk diffusion test provides only qualitative results, categorizing bacterial susceptibility as susceptible, intermediate, or resistant based on inhibition zone diameters, without determining the exact minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC).^[12] This limitation arises because the method relies on the visual extent of antibiotic diffusion rather than precise quantitative measurement of bacterial growth inhibition.^[12] Variability in zone sizes can occur due to differences in antibiotic diffusion rates through the agar medium, which can be problematic for anaerobic bacteria, although recent EUCAST guidelines (as of 2025) provide standardized disk diffusion methods to minimize variations.^[59]^[61] Additionally, errors in inoculum preparation, such as deviations from the standard 0.5 McFarland turbidity, can alter zone diameters by at least 3 mm, leading to misinterpretation of susceptibility.^[62] The test is not suitable for slow-growing bacteria, as prolonged incubation times can result in falsely large inhibition zones and unreliable results.^[7] False susceptibility may also arise in strains with active efflux pumps, which can reduce intracellular antibiotic accumulation and mask resistance during diffusion-based testing.^[26] For detecting specific resistance mechanisms like extended-spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBLs), phenotypic disk diffusion screening is typically confirmed using additional phenotypic tests, such as combination disk methods or Etest, per CLSI guidelines.^[23] To address these challenges, automation through plate readers has been implemented to standardize zone measurement and reduce manual errors, achieving accuracy comparable to manual methods.^[63] Integration with MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry enables faster bacterial identification prior to disk diffusion, shortening overall turnaround time for susceptibility results.^[64] Despite these advancements, the test remains less accurate for polymyxins like colistin due to their poor and slow diffusion through agar, often leading to unreliable zone interpretations.^[65] Ongoing updates, such as the 2025 CLSI guidelines introducing colistin broth disk elution and agar tests as supplemental methods, highlight the need for refined protocols to address emerging resistance patterns.^[66]

References

[1]
[PDF] Kirby-Bauer Disk Diffusion Susceptibility Test Protocol
Dec 8, 2009 · The purpose of the Kirby-Bauer disk diffusion susceptibility test is to determine the sensitivity or resistance of pathogenic aerobic and ...Missing: authoritative | Show results with:authoritative
[2]
Disk Diffusion and Quality Control - EUCAST
EUCAST have developed standardised disk diffusion methods for both aerobic and anaerobic bacteria. EUCAST antimicrobial susceptibility testing is performed ...
[3]
Current and Emerging Methods of Antibiotic Susceptibility Testing
May 3, 2019 · Standardized disk diffusion was introduced by Bauer and Kirby's experiments in 1956, after finalizing all aspects of optimization by changing ...
[4]
None
### Summary of Disk Placement in EUCAST Disk Diffusion (Version 13.0, January 2025)
[5]
https://www.eucast.org/fileadmin/eucast/pdf/disk_test_documents/archive/v_15.0_EUCAST_QC_tables_routine_and_extended_QC.pdf
[6]
Methods for screening and evaluation of antimicrobial activity - NIH
The agar diffusion technique has a rich history dating back to the late 18th century, when Beijerinck first utilized it to study auxin' effect on the growth ...
[7]
Current and Emerging Methods of Antibiotic Susceptibility Testing
May 3, 2019 · Standardized disk diffusion was introduced by Bauer and Kirby's experiments in 1956, after finalizing all aspects of optimization by changing ...<|separator|>
[8]
Antimicrobial susceptibility testing - What is Biotechnology
In 1966 the WHO selected the Kirby-Bauer disc diffusion test to become the gold standard for antimicrobial susceptibility testing. It was a modified version of ...
[9]
The Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute Subcommittee ... - NIH
Jan 8, 2020 · The first antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) document, Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Disc Susceptibility Tests, was published ...
[10]
EUCAST: EUCAST - Home
EUCAST is a scientific committee formed in 1997 and is jointly organized by ESCMID, ECDC and European national breakpoint committees. EUCAST develops ...Clinical breakpoints · Disk diffusion implementation · Disk Diffusion and Quality...
[11]
Recognized Consensus Standards: Medical Devices - FDA
Sep 17, 2018 · This standard describes the reference agar disk diffusion method used to determine the in vitro antimicrobial susceptibility of bacteria ...Missing: adoption 1981
[12]
Document Archive - EUCAST
Disk diffusion - Manual v 9.0 (1 January, 2021); Disk diffusion - Slide show v 9.0 (1 January, 2021); Disk diffusion - Reading guide v 8.0 (1 January, 2021) ...
[13]
Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing: A Comprehensive Review of ...
This article reviews common antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) methods and relevant issues concerning the advantages and disadvantages of each method.<|control11|><|separator|>
[14]
Development of the EUCAST disk diffusion antimicrobial ...
Aug 28, 2013 · This paper describes the development and calibration of the disk diffusion method, how quality control targets and ranges were developed and validated.
[15]
Development of the EUCAST disk diffusion antimicrobial ... - PubMed
The development of the EUCAST disk diffusion method and quality control criteria are described, together with guidance on quality control and implementation of ...
[16]
Mueller Hinton Agar (MHA)- Composition, Principle, Preparation ...
Jan 5, 2022 · MHA is recommended for the diffusion of antimicrobial agents impregnated on paper disc through an agar gel as described in CLSI Approved ...Missing: guidelines | Show results with:guidelines
[17]
M23S3 | Procedure for Confirming the Acceptability of Mueller ... - CLSI
Jun 15, 2023 · This document outlines the technical requirements for verifying the suitability of Mueller-Hinton agar sources for use in CLSI and/or EUCAST studies.
[18]
[PDF] Antimicrobial susceptibility testing EUCAST disk diffusion method
Table 2 Preparation of 0.5 McFarland turbidity standard. 1. Add 0.5 mL of 0.048 mol/L BaCl2 (1.175% w/v BaCl2·2H20) to 99.5 mL of 0.18 mol/L (0.36 N) H2S04 (1 ...
[19]
How to do a Kirby Bauer Disk Diffusion Antimicrobial Susceptibility ...
Feb 5, 2024 · Materials needed to perform a Kirby-Bauer disk diffusion test include: · Mueller Hinton agar plates · Sterile cotton swabs, or dacron swabs ...Missing: authoritative | Show results with:authoritative
[20]
Antimicrobial susceptibility testing: currently used methods and ...
May 17, 2020 · Up to 12 commercially prepared paper discs (approximately 6 mm in diameter) ... CLSI and EUCAST provide the most-recognized standards.<|separator|>
[21]
[PDF] DISKS FOR ANTIBIOTIC SUSCEPTIBILITY TESTING - Bio-Rad
(A)According to current guidelines CLSI(4), EUCAST(9). Bio-Rad disks are 6.5 mm disks made from superior quality absorbent paper and impregnated with precise ...
[22]
[PDF] MUELLER HINTON AGAR WITH 5% SHEEP BLOOD
The CLSI medium of choice for susceptibility testing of Streptococcus pneumoniae is Mueller. Hinton Agar supplemented with 5% defibrinated sheep blood.
[23]
[PDF] Mueller Hinton Agar with Blood - Hardy Diagnostics
Fresh, defibrinated sheep blood is added to support the growth of the fastidious microorganism, Streptococcus pneumoniae. The Kirby-Bauer antimicrobial disk ...
[24]
Antimicrobial Susceptibility Profile of Extended Spectrum β ... - NIH
Zone diameter interpretative criteria for E. coli. ANTIBIOTIC DISC, SENSITIVE, INTERMEDIATE, RESISTANT. Penicillins. Ampicillin, ≥17, 14–16 ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[25]
[PDF] iqcp-example-disk-diffusion.pdf - CLSI
Package inserts for all disk diffusion susceptibility testing media contain testing principle and procedure, QC recommendations, and limitations. Package ...
[26]
[PDF] HardyDisks - disk diffusion susceptibility test procedure - Kirby Bauer
Deposit disks so that the centers are at least 24mm apart; up to. 12 disks may be placed on a 150mm plate, 5 disks on a 100mm plate. In all cases, however, it ...
[27]
CLSI: Clinical & Laboratory Standards Institute
The Clinical & Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) provides standards and guidelines for medical professionals through its unique consensus process.Standards · Shop · About Us · M100Missing: disk diffusion
[28]
M100 | Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing
CLSI M100 is the gold standard for antimicrobial susceptibility testing, providing the latest breakpoints and quality control parameters for accurate results.
[29]
Point-Counterpoint: Differences between the European Committee ...
Aug 26, 2019 · First, the systematic avoidance by EUCAST of allowing breakpoints to split the MIC distributions of important target wild-type organisms ( ...
[30]
Comparison of Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute and European ...
Apr 11, 2016 · For meropenem, EUCAST uses a resistant breakpoint of >8 ug/mL while CLSI uses ≥8 ug/mL. In effect this has led to a slightly higher meropenem ...
[31]
CLSI and EUCAST Release New Guidance on Modifications to ...
Aug 19, 2025 · CLSI and EUCAST are actively developing joint guidance to further support harmonized AST method development and modification. ... The European ...
[32]
Impact of CLSI and EUCAST breakpoint discrepancies on reporting ...
... Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST), are far from harmonized. Both systems are recommended in the World Health Organization's Global Antimicrobial ...
[33]
https://academic.oup.com/jac/article-pdf/48/suppl_1/1/37465987/jac_48_suppl1_1.pdf
[34]
History and development of antimicrobial susceptibility testing ...
This paper traces the history and development of some methods still in common use for routine AST, e.g. disc diffusion and agar dilution. It was quickly ...
[35]
VI. Procedure for the Cup Assay for Penicillin - ASM Journals
Abraham et al. (1941) claimed a ±- 25 per cent precision for the cup method. It isprobable that it is well within that figure and can be taken as nearer 4 ...
[36]
Antibiotic Susceptibility Testing - Encyclopedia.pub
... Oxford cup method,” was subsequently developed by Abraham et al. in 1941, where the gutter was replaced with a glass cup for diffusion. Simultaneously ...
[37]
Assessment of formulas for calculating critical concentration by the ...
Mar 5, 1987 · It is also possible to calcu- late the zone diameter breakpoints (6). Since the critical concentrations are obtained by extrapo- lation when r = ...
[38]
Rapid AST in blood culture - EUCAST
EUCAST RAST fills this gap by providing results within 4 to 8 hours of incubation. The method is validated for positive blood cultures.
[39]
The EUCAST rapid disc diffusion method for antimicrobial ...
Feb 4, 2020 · EUCAST decided to develop a standardized rapid method, based on EUCAST disc diffusion, to offer susceptibility reports within 4–8 h of a positive blood culture ...
[40]
Methods and Quality Control - EUCAST
Methods and Quality Control. EUCAST has validated a method for direct plating of disk diffusion MH and MHF agar plates from positive blood culture bottles.Missing: procedure | Show results with:procedure
[41]
Breakpoints for Rapid AST - EUCAST
Breakpoints validated for EUCAST short incubation disk diffusion directly from positive blood culture bottles. For interpretation of rapid AST directly from ...Missing: procedure | Show results with:procedure<|control11|><|separator|>
[42]
Resistance Detection in RAST - EUCAST
EUCAST has validated using separate screening cut-offs for the detection of E. coli and K. pneumoniae with ESBL or carbapenemases. Screening for resistance ...Missing: Enterobacterales | Show results with:Enterobacterales
[43]
Screening for R-mechanisms - eucast
EUCAST has validated using separate screening cut-offs for the detection of E. coli and K. pneumoniae with ESBL or carbapenemases.Missing: Enterobacterales | Show results with:Enterobacterales
[44]
https://www.eucast.org/news-detail/rast-methodology-updated/
[45]
In-vitro susceptibility testing methods for the combination of ... - NIH
Jun 17, 2022 · The current study depicted the usefulness of combining ceftazidime-avibactam with aztreonam against organisms producing metallo-beta-lactamases.
[46]
A simple disk pre-diffusion test to predict in vitro aztreonam ...
This study aimed to describe an easy-to-perform and low-cost test to predict the efficacy of the ATM-AVI combination based on modifying the disk pre-diffusion ...Missing: antibiotic | Show results with:antibiotic
[47]
M44 | Method for Antifungal Disk Diffusion Susceptibility Testing of ...
$$180.00This CLSI guideline provides a simple, rapid, and cost-effective method for antifungal susceptibility testing of Candida spp. using disk diffusion.
[48]
Evaluation of CLSI M44-A2 Disk Diffusion and Associated ... - NIH
For caspofungin, 5-μg disks are approved, and for micafungin, 10-μg disks are under evaluation.Missing: placement spacing
[49]
Can We Improve Antifungal Susceptibility Testing? - Frontiers
Other limitation of the disk diffusion method is the low number of commercially available disks infused with antifungals. For yeasts, this method is ...
[50]
Thin-Layer Chromatography Bioautography - PMC - NIH
Jul 31, 2021 · This review summarizes known TLC bioautography types and practical applications for determining antibacterial, antifungal, antitumor and ...
[51]
Role of Direct Bioautographic Method for Detection ... - Sage Journals
Direct bioautography combined with thin layer chromatographic (TLC) separation is a rapid and sensitive screening method for the detection of antimicrobial.Missing: disk | Show results with:disk<|control11|><|separator|>
[52]
Bioautography and its scope in the field of natural product chemistry
Agar diffusion or contact bioautography. In contact bioautography, antimicrobial agents diffuse from a developed TLC plate or paper to an inoculated agar ...Missing: types vapor
[53]
Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing - StatPearls - NCBI Bookshelf - NIH
Both disk diffusion and MIC methods employ the phenotypic identification of susceptibility and, therefore, require the following process: Preparation of a ...
[54]
Clinical utility of direct disk diffusion testing in guiding antibiotic ...
Oct 11, 2025 · Direct disk diffusion test of positive blood culture yields result ∼24 hours sooner. •. Rapid testing increased earlier correct antibiotic use ...
[55]
Disk diffusion antimicrobial susceptibility testing for clinical and ...
We propose a list of antimicrobial agents chosen specifically for their value in disk susceptibility testing for clinical and epidemiologic purposes and ...Missing: applications | Show results with:applications
[56]
Impact of the Disk Diffusion Test on Fluconazole De-Escalation in ...
Nov 10, 2022 · Disk diffusion (DD) is a simple antifungal susceptibility method for Candida. This study examined the impact of fluconazole DD testing on antifungal de- ...
[57]
Disk Diffusion Method for Antibiotic Susceptibility Test
The disk diffusion method, also known as Kirby-Bauer, evaluates bacterial sensitivity to antibiotics by observing inhibition zones around disks.Missing: increase | Show results with:increase
[58]
Antimicrobial susceptibility testing: An updated primer for clinicians ...
Feb 24, 2023 · This updated primer serves to reinforce important principles of AST, and to provide guidance on their implementation and optimization.Missing: NCCLS | Show results with:NCCLS<|separator|>
[59]
The Continued Value of Disk Diffusion for Assessing Antimicrobial ...
Jul 26, 2018 · Use of disk diffusion testing for new antimicrobials allows laboratories to customize the panel of new antimicrobials to be tested, to ...
[60]
Direct Disk Diffusion Testing and Antimicrobial Stewardship for ...
Jul 19, 2025 · This study demonstrated that integrating direct DD testing with AMS significantly reduced the time to optimal antibiotic therapy and decreased ...
[61]
Influence of Inoculum Concentration on Zone Size in Disk Diffusion ...
played changes in diameter of at least 3 mm. Specific instances of the in- fluence of the inoculum concentration on zone sizes for antimicrobial agents and ...
[62]
Performance of Fully Automated Antimicrobial Disk Diffusion ...
Aug 18, 2021 · The Colibri coupled to the Radian provide a fully automated solution for antimicrobial disk diffusion susceptibility testing with an accuracy that is equal to ...
[63]
Rapid identification by MALDI-TOF/MS and antimicrobial disk ...
The objectives of this study were to define the shortest incubation times on the WASPLab for reliable MALDI-TOF/MS-based species identification and for the ...Missing: faster | Show results with:faster
[64]
Polymyxin Susceptibility Testing and Interpretive Breakpoints
Jan 27, 2020 · First, disk diffusion test results remain unreliable due to poor and slow polymyxin diffusion out of the disk and through agar media, leading to ...
[65]
Evaluation of colistin susceptibility by four phenotypic methods ...
Jul 5, 2025 · The CLSI has introduced colistin broth disk elution (CBDE) and colistin agar tests (CAT) as a supplemental test for testing members of ...