Literature DB >> 31679102

Breakpoint beware: reliance on historical breakpoints for Enterobacteriaceae leads to discrepancies in interpretation of susceptibility testing for carbapenems and cephalosporins and gaps in detection of carbapenem-resistant organisms.

Melanie L Yarbrough1, Meghan A Wallace2, Robert F Potter3, Alaric W D'Souza3, Gautam Dantas2,3,4,5, Carey-Ann D Burnham2,4,6,7.   

Abstract

Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) are an important public health and infection prevention threat. CRE are typically detected via phenotypic antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST), for which interpretive standards were modified in recent years. Our objective was to measure the impact of breakpoint changes on AST interpretation for CRE. Zone sizes from disk diffusion AST for Enterobacteriaceae isolates recovered from clinical cultures over a 1-year period (n = 10,183) and CRE from clinical and environmental sources from the USA and Pakistan (n = 342) were evaluated. Results were interpreted according to historical (CLSI M100-S19) and current (CLSI M100-S29) breakpoints. Interpretive errors were calculated according to the FDA definitions. Using current breakpoints as the reference standard, 56 (17%) very major (false susceptibility) errors occurred for cefepime and 13 (45%) very major errors for meropenem interpretation using historical breakpoints in clinical isolates of Enterobacteriaceae, corresponding to 12 carbapenemase-producing CRE that would have been missed during the 1-year period. For confirmed blaKPC CP-CRE clinical and environmental isolates (n = 149), the very major error rate for historic breakpoints was 8%, 30%, 63%, and 0% for cefepime, meropenem, imipenem, and ertapenem, respectively. For blaKPC isolates, the use of historical breakpoints would have led to 42 (28%) reports of false susceptibility to meropenem. Failure to adopt updated AST breakpoints may lead to reports of false susceptibility for antimicrobials commonly used to treat Gram-negative infections and preclude recognition of CRE. Such errors could negatively impact patient care and hamper infection control and public health efforts.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breakpoint; Carbapenemase-producing CRE; Enterobacteriaceae; KPC

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31679102     DOI: 10.1007/s10096-019-03711-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis        ISSN: 0934-9723            Impact factor:   3.267


  25 in total

1.  Accuracy of carbapenem nonsusceptibility for identification of KPC-possessing Enterobacteriaceae by use of the revised CLSI breakpoints.

Authors:  David Landman; Julius Salamera; Manisha Singh; John Quale
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2011-08-31       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Widespread implementation of EUCAST breakpoints for antibacterial susceptibility testing in Europe.

Authors:  D Brown; R Canton; L Dubreuil; S Gatermann; C Giske; A MacGowan; L Martinez-Martinez; J Mouton; R Skov; M Steinbakk; C Walton; O Heuer; M J Struelens; L Diaz Hogberg; G Kahlmeter
Journal:  Euro Surveill       Date:  2015-01-15

Review 3.  Understanding and Addressing CLSI Breakpoint Revisions: a Primer for Clinical Laboratories.

Authors:  Romney M Humphries; April N Abbott; Janet A Hindler
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2019-05-24       Impact factor: 5.948

4.  Evaluation of Genotypic and Phenotypic Methods to Detect Carbapenemase Production in Gram-Negative Bacilli.

Authors:  Allison R McMullen; Melanie L Yarbrough; Meghan A Wallace; Angela Shupe; Carey-Ann D Burnham
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  2017-01-10       Impact factor: 8.327

Review 5.  The Continued Value of Disk Diffusion for Assessing Antimicrobial Susceptibility in Clinical Laboratories: Report from the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute Methods Development and Standardization Working Group.

Authors:  Romney M Humphries; Susan Kircher; Andrea Ferrell; Kevin M Krause; Rianna Malherbe; Andre Hsiung; C A Burnham
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2018-07-26       Impact factor: 5.948

6.  Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae Detection Practices in California: What Are We Missing?

Authors:  Romney M Humphries; Janet A Hindler; Erin Epson; Sam Horwich-Scholefield; Loren G Miller; Job Mendez; Jeremias B Martinez; Jacob Sinkowitz; Darren Sinkowtiz; Christina Hershey; Patricia Marquez; Sandeep Bhaurla; Marcelo Moran; Lindsey Pandes; Dawn Terashita; James A McKinnell
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2018-03-19       Impact factor: 9.079

7.  Cefepime combined with amoxicillin/clavulanic acid: a new choice for the KPC-producing K. pneumoniae infection.

Authors:  Shujuan Ji; Fangfang Lv; Xiaoxing Du; Zeqing Wei; Ying Fu; Xinli Mu; Yan Jiang; Yunsong Yu
Journal:  Int J Infect Dis       Date:  2015-08-06       Impact factor: 3.623

8.  Improved Phenotype-Based Definition for Identifying Carbapenemase Producers among Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae.

Authors:  Nora Chea; Sandra N Bulens; Thiphasone Kongphet-Tran; Ruth Lynfield; Kristin M Shaw; Paula Snippes Vagnone; Marion A Kainer; Daniel B Muleta; Lucy Wilson; Elisabeth Vaeth; Ghinwa Dumyati; Cathleen Concannon; Erin C Phipps; Karissa Culbreath; Sarah J Janelle; Wendy M Bamberg; Alice Y Guh; Brandi Limbago; Alexander J Kallen
Journal:  Emerg Infect Dis       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 6.883

9.  Impact of CLSI and EUCAST breakpoint discrepancies on reporting of antimicrobial susceptibility and AMR surveillance.

Authors:  T P Cusack; E A Ashley; C L Ling; S Rattanavong; T Roberts; P Turner; T Wangrangsimakul; D A B Dance
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Infect       Date:  2019-03-23       Impact factor: 8.067

10.  Draft Genome Sequence of the blaOXA-436- and blaNDM-1-Harboring Shewanella putrefaciens SA70 Isolate.

Authors:  Robert F Potter; Alaric W D'Souza; Meghan A Wallace; Angela Shupe; Sanket Patel; Danish Gul; Jennie H Kwon; Saadia Andleeb; C A Burnham; Gautam Dantas
Journal:  Genome Announc       Date:  2017-07-20
View more
  5 in total

1.  Reporting Considerations for Cefepime-Susceptible and -Susceptible-Dose Dependent Results for Carbapenemase-Producing Enterobacterales.

Authors:  J A Fissel; M L Yarbrough; T Tekle; C A Burnham; P J Simner
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2020-08-24       Impact factor: 5.948

Review 2.  The Practical Problem With Carbapenem Testing and Reporting Accurate Bacterial Susceptibilities.

Authors:  Mark Redell; Glenn S Tillotson
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2022-04-25       Impact factor: 5.988

3.  Raising the Bar: Improving Antimicrobial Resistance Detection by Clinical Laboratories by Ensuring Use of Current Breakpoints.

Authors:  Patricia J Simner; Carol A Rauch; Isabella W Martin; Kaede V Sullivan; Daniel Rhoads; Robin Rolf; Rosemary She; Rhona J Souers; Christina Wojewoda; Romney M Humphries
Journal:  Open Forum Infect Dis       Date:  2022-02-07       Impact factor: 3.835

Review 4.  The Collateral Effects of COVID-19 Pandemic on the Status of Carbapenemase-Producing Pathogens.

Authors:  Carole Ayoub Moubareck; Dalal Hammoudi Halat
Journal:  Front Cell Infect Microbiol       Date:  2022-03-17       Impact factor: 5.293

Review 5.  The antibiogram: key considerations for its development and utilization.

Authors:  William R Truong; Levita Hidayat; Michael A Bolaris; Lee Nguyen; Jason Yamaki
Journal:  JAC Antimicrob Resist       Date:  2021-05-25
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.