OBJECTIVES: To assess the performance of the agar disc diffusion method for the detection of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (CPE) referred to the national reference laboratories (NRLs) in Belgium and France. METHODS: All Enterobacteriaceae isolates referred to the NRLs for the confirmation of CPE in 2012 were included. The inhibition zone diameters of meropenem, piperacillin/tazobactam and temocillin using CLSI disc diffusion methodology were recorded. Phenotypic and molecular detection of carbapenemases was performed on all isolates. RESULTS: A total of 1354 Enterobacteriaceae isolates, including 435 (32.1%) confirmed CPE isolates [OXA-48 (n = 323), KPC (n = 60), VIM (n = 32) and NDM (n = 20)] and 919 carbapenemase-negative isolates, were tested. Using recommended interpretative criteria, non-susceptibility to meropenem had poor sensitivity (52.0% by CLSI susceptibility breakpoint and 80.0% by EUCAST screening breakpoints), while non-susceptibility to piperacillin/tazobactam (according to CLSI breakpoint) or to temocillin (according to Fuchs, Barry, Thornsberry et al. Eur J Clin Microbiol 1985; 4: 30-3) was highly sensitive (99.8% and 98.2%, respectively) but poorly specific (29.4% and 42.9%, respectively) for the detection of CPE. Temocillin diameters <12 mm alone had high specificity (90.0%) and the combination of temocillin diameters ≥12 mm with piperacillin/tazobactam diameters ≥16 mm observed in 40% of all referred isolates displayed excellent negative predictive value (99.2%). CONCLUSIONS: In geographical areas with a high prevalence of OXA-48 producers, recommended meropenem susceptibility or screening breakpoints failed to detect CPE in a large proportion of isolates. The combination of modified zone diameter cut-offs for piperacillin/tazobactam (≥16 mm) and temocillin (≥12 mm) can be used to rule out the presence of carbapenemase and avoid unnecessary additional testing for confirmation of CPE.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: To assess the performance of the agar disc diffusion method for the detection of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (CPE) referred to the national reference laboratories (NRLs) in Belgium and France. METHODS: All Enterobacteriaceae isolates referred to the NRLs for the confirmation of CPE in 2012 were included. The inhibition zone diameters of meropenem, piperacillin/tazobactam and temocillin using CLSI disc diffusion methodology were recorded. Phenotypic and molecular detection of carbapenemases was performed on all isolates. RESULTS: A total of 1354 Enterobacteriaceae isolates, including 435 (32.1%) confirmed CPE isolates [OXA-48 (n = 323), KPC (n = 60), VIM (n = 32) and NDM (n = 20)] and 919 carbapenemase-negative isolates, were tested. Using recommended interpretative criteria, non-susceptibility to meropenem had poor sensitivity (52.0% by CLSI susceptibility breakpoint and 80.0% by EUCAST screening breakpoints), while non-susceptibility to piperacillin/tazobactam (according to CLSI breakpoint) or to temocillin (according to Fuchs, Barry, Thornsberry et al. Eur J Clin Microbiol 1985; 4: 30-3) was highly sensitive (99.8% and 98.2%, respectively) but poorly specific (29.4% and 42.9%, respectively) for the detection of CPE. Temocillin diameters <12 mm alone had high specificity (90.0%) and the combination of temocillin diameters ≥12 mm with piperacillin/tazobactam diameters ≥16 mm observed in 40% of all referred isolates displayed excellent negative predictive value (99.2%). CONCLUSIONS: In geographical areas with a high prevalence of OXA-48 producers, recommended meropenem susceptibility or screening breakpoints failed to detect CPE in a large proportion of isolates. The combination of modified zone diameter cut-offs for piperacillin/tazobactam (≥16 mm) and temocillin (≥12 mm) can be used to rule out the presence of carbapenemase and avoid unnecessary additional testing for confirmation of CPE.
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
Authors: M De Laveleye; T D Huang; P Bogaerts; C Berhin; C Bauraing; P Sacré; A Noel; Y Glupczynski Journal: Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis Date: 2016-09-17 Impact factor: 3.267
Authors: James A Karlowsky; Sibylle H Lob; Krystyna M Kazmierczak; Robert E Badal; Katherine Young; Mary R Motyl; Daniel F Sahm Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2017-03-15 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Johan Bengtsson-Palme; Martin Angelin; Mikael Huss; Sanela Kjellqvist; Erik Kristiansson; Helena Palmgren; D G Joakim Larsson; Anders Johansson Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2015-08-10 Impact factor: 5.191