Literature DB >> 24478467

Performance of Vitek 2 for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Staphylococcus spp. and Enterococcus spp.

April M Bobenchik1, Janet A Hindler, Carmen L Giltner, Sandra Saeki, Romney M Humphries.   

Abstract

Vitek 2 (bioMérieux, Inc., Durham, NC) is a widely used commercial antimicrobial susceptibility testing system. We compared MIC results obtained by Vitek 2 to those obtained by the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) broth microdilution (BMD) reference method for 134 staphylococcal and 84 enterococcal clinical isolates. Nineteen agents were evaluated, including all those available on Vitek 2 for testing staphylococci and enterococci. The resistance phenotypes tested included methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) (n = 58), S. aureus with inducible clindamycin resistance (ICR) (n = 30), trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole-resistant MRSA (n = 10), vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (n = 37), high-level gentamicin-resistant Enterococcus (n = 15), linezolid-resistant Enterococcus (n = 5), and daptomycin-nonsusceptible Enterococcus faecalis (n = 6). For the staphylococci, there was 98.9% categorical agreement (CA). There was one very major error (VME) for gentamicin in a Staphylococcus hominis isolate, six VMEs for inducible clindamycin in S. aureus isolates, and two major errors (ME) for daptomycin in an S. aureus and a Staphylococcus epidermidis isolate. For enterococci, there was 97.3% CA. Two VMEs were observed for daptomycin in isolates of E. faecalis and 2 ME, 1 for high-level gentamicin resistance and 1 for nitrofurantoin, in E. faecium isolates. Overall, there was 98.3% CA and 99% essential agreement for the testing of staphylococci and enterococci by the Vitek 2. With the exception of detecting ICR in S. aureus, Vitek 2 performed reliably for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of staphylococci and enterococci.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24478467      PMCID: PMC3911353          DOI: 10.1128/JCM.02432-13

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Microbiol        ISSN: 0095-1137            Impact factor:   5.948


  23 in total

1.  Detection of inducible clindamycin resistance of staphylococci in conjunction with performance of automated broth susceptibility testing.

Authors:  J H Jorgensen; S A Crawford; M L McElmeel; K R Fiebelkorn
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Analysis of the comparative workflow and performance characteristics of the VITEK 2 and Phoenix systems.

Authors:  U Eigner; A Schmid; U Wild; D Bertsch; A-M Fahr
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  Accuracy of six antimicrobial susceptibility methods for testing linezolid against staphylococci and enterococci.

Authors:  Fred C Tenover; Portia P Williams; Sheila Stocker; Angela Thompson; Leigh Ann Clark; Brandi Limbago; Roberta B Carey; Susan M Poppe; Dean Shinabarger; John E McGowan
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2007-07-18       Impact factor: 5.948

4.  Susceptibility of enterococci to daptomycin is dependent upon testing methodology.

Authors:  Kendall A Bryant; Amity L Roberts; Mark E Rupp; James R Anderson; Elizabeth R Lyden; Paul D Fey; Trevor C Van Schooneveld
Journal:  Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2013-05-27       Impact factor: 2.803

5.  Prevalence of inducible clindamycin resistance among community- and hospital-associated Staphylococcus aureus isolates.

Authors:  Mukesh Patel; Ken B Waites; Stephen A Moser; Gretchen A Cloud; Craig J Hoesley
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 5.948

6.  Prevalence of inducible clindamycin resistance in macrolide-resistant Staphylococcus spp.

Authors:  S Fokas; S Fokas; M Tsironi; M Kalkani; M Dionysopouloy
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Infect       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 8.067

7.  Clindamycin treatment of Staphylococcus aureus expressing inducible clindamycin resistance.

Authors:  D Drinkovic; E R Fuller; K P Shore; D J Holland; R Ellis-Pegler
Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 5.790

8.  Detection and prevalence of inducible clindamycin resistance in staphylococci.

Authors:  Gurdal Yilmaz; Kemalettin Aydin; Serap Iskender; Rahmet Caylan; Iftihar Koksal
Journal:  J Med Microbiol       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 2.472

9.  Failure of clindamycin treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus expressing inducible clindamycin resistance in vitro.

Authors:  George K Siberry; Tsigereda Tekle; Karen Carroll; James Dick
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2003-10-03       Impact factor: 9.079

10.  Incidence of constitutive and inducible clindamycin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus and coagulase-negative staphylococci in a community and a tertiary care hospital.

Authors:  Paul C Schreckenberger; Elizabeth Ilendo; Kathryn L Ristow
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 5.948

View more
  18 in total

1.  Comparison of Automated Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing Systems To Detect mecC-Positive Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

Authors:  Camille Kolenda; Céline Dupieux; Jean-Winoc Decousser; Anders Rhod Larsen; Bruno Pichon; Mark Holmes; Michèle Bès; Christopher Teale; Elizabeth Dickson; Robert Hill; Robert Skov; Angela Kearns; Frédéric Laurent
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2017-09-13       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Comparison of commercial antimicrobial susceptibility test methods for testing of Staphylococcus aureus and Enterococci against vancomycin, daptomycin, and linezolid.

Authors:  Stefan Riedel; Kar Mun Neoh; Stephen W Eisinger; Lisa M Dam; Tsigereda Tekle; Karen C Carroll
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2014-04-09       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  Performance of Vitek 2 for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Enterobacteriaceae with Vitek 2 (2009 FDA) and 2014 CLSI breakpoints.

Authors:  April M Bobenchik; Eszter Deak; Janet A Hindler; Carmen L Charlton; Romney M Humphries
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2014-12-24       Impact factor: 5.948

4.  Linezolid plasma and intrapulmonary concentrations in critically ill obese patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia: intermittent vs continuous administration.

Authors:  Gennaro De Pascale; Serena Fortuna; Mario Tumbarello; Salvatore Lucio Cutuli; MariaSole Vallecoccia; Teresa Spanu; Giuseppe Bello; Luca Montini; Mariano Alberto Pennisi; Pierluigi Navarra; Massimo Antonelli
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2014-11-21       Impact factor: 17.440

Review 5.  Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing for Enterococci.

Authors:  Ayesha Khan; William R Miller; Dierdre Axell-House; Jose M Munita; Cesar A Arias
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2022-06-13       Impact factor: 11.677

6.  Comparison of Minocycline Susceptibility Testing Methods for Carbapenem-Resistant Acinetobacter baumannii.

Authors:  Peng Wang; Sarah L Bowler; Serena F Kantz; Roberta T Mettus; Yan Guo; Christi L McElheny; Yohei Doi
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2016-09-14       Impact factor: 5.948

7.  Evaluation of the automated Vitek 2 system for detection of various mechanisms of macrolide and lincosamide resistance in Staphylococcus aureus.

Authors:  Lorenzo Filippin; Sandrine Roisin; Claire Nonhoff; Stien Vandendriessche; Amélie Heinrichs; Olivier Denis
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2014-09-10       Impact factor: 5.948

8.  Direct antimicrobial susceptibility testing from positive blood culture bottles in laboratories lacking automated antimicrobial susceptibility testing systems.

Authors:  Mahadevan Kumar; S P S Shergill; Kundan Tandel; Kavita Sahai; R M Gupta
Journal:  Med J Armed Forces India       Date:  2018-12-20

9.  The Need for Dedicated Microbiology Leadership in the Clinical Microbiology Laboratory.

Authors:  Linoj P Samuel; Glen T Hansen; Colleen S Kraft; Bobbi S Pritt
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2021-07-19       Impact factor: 5.948

10.  Comparative Performances of Vitek-2, Disk Diffusion, and Broth Microdilution for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing of Canine Staphylococcus pseudintermedius.

Authors:  Elisa Rampacci; Michele Trotta; Caterina Fani; Serenella Silvestri; Valentina Stefanetti; Chiara Brachelente; Antonella Mencacci; Fabrizio Passamonti
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2021-08-18       Impact factor: 5.948

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.