Literature DB >> 20649801

Comparison of disk diffusion, Etest and VITEK2 for detection of carbapenemase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae with the EUCAST and CLSI breakpoint systems.

M Vading1, Ø Samuelsen, B Haldorsen, A S Sundsfjord, C G Giske.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare CLSI and EUCAST MIC and disk diffusion carbapenem breakpoints for the detection of carbapenemase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae. K. pneumoniae strains with known KPC (n = 31) or VIM (n = 20) carbapenemases were characterized by disk diffusion (Oxoid) and Etest (bioMérieux) vs. imipenem, meropenem and ertapenem, and with VITEK2 (bioMérieux, five different cards). Extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL) testing was performed with VITEK2 (bioMérieux), ESBL combination disks (Becton Dickinson) and the ESBL Etest (bioMérieux). With CLSI and EUCAST MIC breakpoints, respectively, 11 and seven of the strains were susceptible to imipenem, 12 and eight to meropenem, and seven and none to ertapenem. The EUCAST epidemiological cut-off (ECOFF) values for meropenem and ertapenem identified all carbapenemase producers, whereas the imipenem ECOFF failed in five strains. All carbapenemase producers were detected with EUCAST disk diffusion breakpoints for ertapenem and meropenem, and four strains were susceptible to imipenem. CLSI disk diffusion breakpoints characterized 18 (imipenem), 14 (meropenem) and three (ertapenem) isolates as susceptible. When cards with a single carbapenem were used, detection failures with VITEK2 were four for imipenem, none for meropenem and one for ertapenem. Cards containing all three carbapenems had one to two failures. With ESBL combination disks, 21/31 KPC producers and 2/20 VIM producers were positive. With VITEK2, no VIM producers and between none and seven KPC producers were ESBL-positive. All carbapenemase producers were detected with the meropenem MIC ECOFF, or the clinical EUCAST breakpoint for ertapenem. EUCAST disk diffusion breakpoints for meropenem and ertapenem detected all carbapenemase producers. VITEK2 had between none and four failures in detecting carbapenemase producers, depending on the antibiotic card.
© 2010 The Authors. Clinical Microbiology and Infection © 2010 European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 20649801     DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2010.03299.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Microbiol Infect        ISSN: 1198-743X            Impact factor:   8.067


  17 in total

Review 1.  Intestinal Carriage of Carbapenemase-Producing Organisms: Current Status of Surveillance Methods.

Authors:  Roberto Viau; Karen M Frank; Michael R Jacobs; Brigid Wilson; Keith Kaye; Curtis J Donskey; Federico Perez; Andrea Endimiani; Robert A Bonomo
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 26.132

2.  Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae: Laboratory Detection and Infection Control Practices.

Authors:  Eva-Brigitta Kruse; Ute Aurbach; Hilmar Wisplinghoff
Journal:  Curr Infect Dis Rep       Date:  2013-10-12       Impact factor: 3.725

3.  Efficient Detection of Carbapenemase Activity in Enterobacteriaceae by Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption Ionization-Time of Flight Mass Spectrometry in Less Than 30 Minutes.

Authors:  Camille Lasserre; Luc De Saint Martin; Gaelle Cuzon; Pierre Bogaerts; Estelle Lamar; Youri Glupczynski; Thierry Naas; Didier Tandé
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2015-04-29       Impact factor: 5.948

4.  Detection of Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC) production in non-Klebsiella pneumoniae Enterobacteriaceae isolates by use of the Phoenix, Vitek 2, and disk diffusion methods.

Authors:  Christopher D Doern; W Michael Dunne; Carey-Ann D Burnham
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2011-01-05       Impact factor: 5.948

Review 5.  Carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae in animals and methodologies for their detection.

Authors:  Rebecca E V Anderson; Patrick Boerlin
Journal:  Can J Vet Res       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 1.310

6.  What Is the Appropriate Meropenem MIC for Screening of Carbapenemase-Producing Enterobacteriaceae in Low-Prevalence Settings?

Authors:  Ramzi Fattouh; Nathalie Tijet; Allison McGeer; Susan M Poutanen; Roberto G Melano; Samir N Patel
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2015-12-28       Impact factor: 5.191

7.  First comprehensive evaluation of the M.I.C. evaluator device compared to Etest and CLSI broth microdilution for MIC testing of aerobic Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacterial species.

Authors:  R P Rennie; L Turnbull; C Brosnikoff; J Cloke
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2012-01-11       Impact factor: 5.948

8.  Phenotypic and molecular characteristics of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae in a health care system in Los Angeles, California, from 2011 to 2013.

Authors:  S Pollett; S Miller; J Hindler; D Uslan; M Carvalho; R M Humphries
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2014-09-10       Impact factor: 5.948

9.  Rapid and sensitive detection of bla KPC gene in clinical isolates of Klebsiella pneumoniae by a molecular real-time assay.

Authors:  Adriana Mosca; Luisa Miragliotta; Raffaele Del Prete; Gerasimos Tzakis; Lidia Dalfino; Francesco Bruno; Laura Pagani; Roberta Migliavacca; Aurora Piazza; Giuseppe Miragliotta
Journal:  Springerplus       Date:  2013-01-30

10.  Single or in combination antimicrobial resistance mechanisms of Klebsiella pneumoniae contribute to varied susceptibility to different carbapenems.

Authors:  Yu-Kuo Tsai; Ci-Hong Liou; Chang-Phone Fung; Jung-Chung Lin; L Kristopher Siu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-11-12       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.