Very Major Errors Research Articles

Colistin, Meropenem–Vaborbactam, Imipenem–Relebactam, and Eravacycline Testing in Carbapenem-Resistant Gram-Negative Rods: A Comparative Evaluation of Broth Microdilution, Gradient Test, and VITEK 2

Objectives. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the performance of different assays for antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) and minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) determination for reserve antibiotics in carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CREs), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (CRPAs), and Acinetobacter baumannii (CRABs). Methods. An analysis was conducted on 100 consecutive isolates: 50 CREs, 35 CRPAs, and 15 CRABs. Sensititre broth microdilution was used as a reference standard to evaluate the performance of VITEK 2 card AST-XN24 (bioMérieux), the respective gradient tests (bioMérieux), and UMIC colistin broth microdilution test strips (Bruker Daltonics). Errors, essential agreement (EA), and categorical agreement of MICs for colistin (COL), meropenem–vaborbactam (MVB), imipenem–relebactam (IRL), and eravacycline (ERV) were assessed. Results. The agreement between both of the COL broth microdilution (BMD) methods was perfect (100/100). The gradient test and VITEK 2 analysis yielded comparable EA rates (92/100 and 72/79, respectively), with the latter not registering any very major errors (VMEs). The MVB gradient test achieved EA in 66 of 85 isolates and VITEK 2 in 70/85. For IRL, EA was reached in 69 and 64 of 85 cases by gradient test and VITEK 2 analysis, respectively. The ERV gradient test yielded false results in nearly all (12/15) CRABs but achieved EA in 46 of 50 CREs. The VITEK system recorded EA for ERV in 60 of 65 isolates. Conclusions. We observed substantial variability in the measured MICs between BMD and the alternative methods. In only a few constellations, VITEK 2 or gradient tests could substitute the reference method. BMD is the method of choice for COL analysis, with VITEK 2 representing an alternative method for CRPA testing. Alternative methods for MVB did not provide reliable results, except for Enterobacterales, when tested with the gradient test. However, resistant results need to be confirmed by BMD. Only BMD can be used for IRL MIC determination. VITEK 2 was mostly accurate in measuring ERV MICs, while the corresponding gradient test yielded reliable results exclusively in CREs. It is essential that laboratories are aware of which testing method provides reliable results for each combination of microorganisms and reserve antibiotics.

Fosfomycin—Overcoming Problematic In Vitro Susceptibility Testing and Tricky Result Interpretation: Comparison of Three Fosfomycin Susceptibility Testing Methods

Background: Fosfomycin (FOS) is an older antimicrobial agent newly rediscovered as a possible treatment for infections with limited therapeutic options (e.g., Gram-negative bacteria with difficult-to-treat resistance, DTR), especially in intravenous form. However, for correct usage of FOS, it is necessary to have a reliable susceptibility testing method suitable for routine practice and robust interpretation criteria. Results: The results were interpreted according to 2023 interpretation criteria provided by the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST). DTR Gram-negatives were more likely to be resistant to FOS (45% in Enterobacterales and 20% in P. aeruginosa) than non-DTR (10% and 6.7%, resp.). All isolates of S. aureus were susceptible to FOS. In Gram-negatives, all agreement values were unacceptable. Etest® performed better in the DTR cohort (categorical agreement, CA, 80%) than in the non-DTR cohort (CA 45.7%). There were no very major errors (VREs) observed in P. aeruginosa. S. aureus had surprisingly low essential agreement (EA) rates (53% for MRSA and 47% for MSSA) for Etest®, but categorical agreement was 100%. Methods: A total of 130 bacterial isolates were tested and compared using the disc diffusion method (DD) and gradient strip method (Etest®) with the reference method (agar dilution, AD). The spectrum of isolates tested was as follows: 40 Enterobacterales (20 DTR vs. 20 non-DTR), 30 Pseudomonas aeruginosa (15 DTR vs. 15 non-DTR), and 60 Staphylococcus aureus (30 methicillin-susceptible, MSSA, vs. 30 methicillin-resistant, MRSA). Conclusions: Neither one of the tested methods was identified as a suitable alternative to AD. It would be beneficial to define more interpretation criteria, at least in some instances.

Clinical Practice: Estimating the Breakpoints for EUCAST Fast Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing Using Flagged BacT/Alert Blood Culture Bottles

<i>Introduction</i>: The escalating prevalence of multidrug resistance is a global threat to human health particularly in critically ill patients with bloodstream infections (BSIs). Delay in the administration of the appropriate antimicrobial treatment is associated with higher mortality rates and adverse consequences. This study attempted to estimate the rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing (RAST) breakpoints directly from flagged BacT/Alert blood culture bottles in clinical practice. <i>Material & Methods</i>: A descriptive, cross-sectional study conducted at a tertiary care hospital in Delhi over a period of two months. The RAST was performed directly from the clinical samples for blood cultures received in our laboratory in parallel with the routine antimicrobial testing as per standard CLSI guidelines. Blood cultures were routinely incubated in BacT/Alert 3D. The inhibition zones were read at 4, 6, 8 and 16-20 hour of incubation as per European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) guidelines. The identification of the isolates was confirmed by Vitek-2 compact system. <i>Results</i>: In our study, the area of technical uncertainty (ATU) percentage was initially high at 4 hours but decreased significantly in later incubation periods. At 4 hours, none of the <i>S. aureus</i> isolates showed >90% categorical agreement (CA) for any antimicrobial tested. However, clindamycin achieved the highest CA (100%) at 6 hours and 90% thereafter, with no very major errors (VME) or major error (ME). Cefoxitin required 8 hours to reach >90% CA, with no VME observed at any time point, but up to 75% ME at 8 hours. At 4 hours, most antimicrobials had high (>1.5%) rates of VME among <i>Enterobacteriales</i>. By 6 hours, only Meropenem and Gentamicin had >90% CA, with no VME observed for other antibiotics. <i>Conclusion</i>: The RAST method is relatively easy to implement in clinical microbiology labs, offering cost-effectiveness, simplicity, and rapid results, especially in resource-limited settings. However, reporting RAST results can be complex due to potential challenges with CA, VME, and ME, particularly in the initial hours of incubation and within the ATU.

A-245 Evaluation of an Automated MALDI-TOF Target and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Suspension Preparation Instrument

Abstract Background Several studies have shown that the implementation of automation in microbiology laboratories may allow for increased volume growth without the need for additional staffing. One of the more recently available pieces of microbiology automation, the COPAN Colibri, automates the manual steps of colony spotting and preparation of targets for use on MALDI-TOF instruments for bacterial identification. This same instrument can also prepare a diluted bacterial inoculum for immediate use on automated susceptibility testing platforms. We wanted to evaluate the performance of both of these functions in real-time with clinical cultures, to determine if implementation would be beneficial over current workflows. Methods The COPAN Colibri was operated following the manufacturer’s recommendations with the exception of the identification of gram-positive organisms. The Colibri is FDA cleared for MALDI-TOF target spotting, however not with the use of formic acid, nor is it FDA cleared for susceptibility suspension preparation. Preliminary data suggested that addition of formic acid was necessary for accurate identification. A subset of cultures were digitally read in real-time as part of clinical workflows, selected for Colibri MALDI-TOF target spotting and Vitek2 suspension preparation using the COPAN WebApp software. Targets were run on the MALDI Bioptyper Sirius (Bruker) and suspensions were run on Vitek2 (BioMerieux) using the pre-dilution mode using GN-99 and GN-801 cards for appropriate organisms. All results were compared to standard manual workflows. Results A total of 145 gram-negative and 60 gram-positive organisms were picked for MALDI-target spotting on Colibri. Compared to standard testing, 144 (99%) gram-negative and 57 (95%) gram-positive Colibri spotted isolates matched expected species-level identifications. 97 Gram negative bacilli were run on Vitek 2 generating 95.52% categorical agreement across all drugs but with 13 major errors (MEs) and 2 very major errors (VMEs), which exceeded the acceptable percentage for certain drugs. The total number of failed runs was 13 (13.34% of total GNB isolates run), and all required complete resetting of MALDI-spotting and suspension preparation. Conclusions The Colibri performed well for MALDI-TOF target spotting with the addition of formic acid for gram-positive organisms. It did not perform within the acceptable range for susceptibility suspension preparation as it exceeded the recommended cutoffs for MEs and VMEs for certain drugs. The proportion of failed runs due to instrument errors may offset any advantages in labor savings due to the need for repeat set up.

Assessment of Lefamulin 20 µg Disk versus Broth Microdilution When Tested against Common Respiratory Pathogens

ObjectiveTo evaluate the performance of the disk diffusion test with lefamulin 20 µg compared with the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) reference broth microdilution method. Methods572 clinical stains, including 240 Staphylococcus aureus, 211 Streptococcus pneumoniae and 121 Haemophilus influenzae, isolated from 71 medical centers from the China Antimicrobial Surveillance Network (CHINET) in 2020. Broth microdilution method and disk diffusion methods were performed according to CLSI. Categorical agreement (CA), major error (ME), and very major error (VME) were calculated. ResultsLefamulin showed potent activity against S. aureus, S. pneumoniae, and H. influenzae. Using the broth microdilution method, lefamulin inhibited 97.1% of S. aureus isolates at 0.25 mg/L; seven isolates were not susceptible. For S. pneumoniae and H. influenzae, the percentage of susceptibility to lefamulin was 100% and no non-susceptible strains were found in this study. Compared with the reference broth microdilution method, the CA of the lefamulin 20 µg disk testing was 99.8% (571/572), with 14.3% (1/7) VME and no ME. In our study, VME was determined in S. aureus. For S. pneumoniae and H. influenzae, the VME was not determined due to the lack of lefamulin non-susceptible strains. ConclusionThe lefamulin 20 µg disk diffusion testing showed excellent CA and ME with the reference broth microdilution method for S. aureus, S. pneumoniae, and H. influenzae. The VME exceeding CLSI recommendations may be a bias due to fewer lefamulin non-susceptible isolates. Our results suggest that lefamulin non-susceptible isolates detected by disk diffusion should be confirmed by the reference BMD.

An investigation of scattered light integrating collector technology for rapid blood culture sensitivity testing.

Introduction. Sepsis rates are increasing, with Gram-negative organisms representing a large proportion of bloodstream infections. Rapid antibiotic administration, alongside diagnostic investigations, is required for the effective management of these patients.Gap statement. Current diagnostics take ~48 h for a final report; therefore, rapid diagnostics are required.Aim. This study investigated a novel antibiotic sensitivity method, the scattered light integrating collector (SLIC), combined with a rapid identification method using matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time of flight (MALDI-TOF) technology to determine if an accurate identification and susceptibility result can be provided within 4 h of a positive blood culture report.Methodology. A total of 47 blood cultures containing Gram-negative bacteria from 46 patients were processed using the MALDI-TOF Biotyper Sepsityper for identification directly from the blood and the SLIC instrument for susceptibility testing. All organisms were also tested using the current standard workflow used in the host laboratory. Categorical agreement (CA), major errors (MaEs) and very major errors (VMEs) were determined.Results. SLIC produced susceptibility results with a 71.9% CA, 30.6% MaE and 17.5% VME. The median difference in time to the final result was 44.14 (43 : 05-45 : 15) h earlier compared to the current method.Conclusion. We conclude that SLIC was unable to consistently provide sufficiently accurate antibiotic susceptibility results compared to the current standard method.

The volatile organic compounds detection in MDR Gram-negatives antimicrobial susceptibility testing: Results from a four-month laboratory experience

Systemic bacterial infections represent a significant clinical challenge due to the increasing resistance rate towards antimicrobials. An essential key to controlling antimicrobial resistance spread is to administer targeted therapy after a precise minimum inhibitory concentration reporting. Among the available fast technologies for antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST), the VITEKⓇ REVEAL™ (Biomerieux, Florence, Italy) proposes volatile organic compounds (VOC) colourimetric arrays to discriminate between susceptible and resistant Gram-negative isolates directly from positive blood cultures. We evaluated this methodology during a four-month laboratory experience on 40 positive blood culture samples, reporting a comparison to standard culture-based methods. The protocol revealed an essential agreement of 100 % between the conventional and the experimental procedures, while the categorical agreement resulted in 97.5 % due to one very major error (VME) for meropenem/vaborbactam in K. pneumoniae. Although further studies will be necessary to investigate its performance on rare microorganisms, the VITEKⓇ REVEAL™ demonstrated an optimal sensitivity in defining MIC values for multi-drug resistant (MDR) microorganisms. These results encourage the application of the method in all high-risk epidemiological areas, confirming the effectiveness of VOC detection in monitoring bacterial susceptibility profiles.

Evaluation of the Reveal® AST (SPECIFIC) for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing from Positive Blood Culture Spiked with Carbapenem-Resistant Isolates.

As bloodstream infections and associated septic shock are common causes of mortality in hospitals, rapid antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST) performed directly on positive blood cultures is needed to implement an efficient therapy in clinical settings. We evaluated the Reveal® rapid AST system on a collection of 197 fully characterized carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales, including 177 carbapenemase producers (CPE) spiked in blood culture bottles. The clinical categorization based on the Minimal Inhibitory Concentration (MIC) determination of eighteen antimicrobial molecules was compared to the clinical categorization based on the disk diffusion assay as a reference. The Reveal AST system provided results within a mean time to result of 5 h. Overall, the categorical agreement (CA) between the two techniques was 94.1%. The rates of very major errors (VMEs), major errors (MEs) and minor errors (mEs) were 3.8%, 3.7% and 5.6%, respectively. Imipenem was the antimicrobial with the lowest CA rate (78.7%), with rates of 15% VMEs and 10.7% MEs, but the performances were better when considering only the non-CPE category (CA of 89%). On this resistant collection of Enterobacterales with numerous acquired β-lactamases, the Specific Reveal assay proved to be useful for a rapid determination of AST compatible with a quick adaptation of the patient's antimicrobial treatment.

Rapid Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing Using the MicroScan System: Performance Evaluation of a 4-Hour Bacterial Cultivation From Positive Blood Cultures.

A reliable and above all, rapid antimicrobial susceptibility test (AST) is required for the diganostics of blood stream infections (BSI). In this study, resistance testing using DxM MicroScan WalkAway (MicroScan) from a 4-h subculture is compared with the standard overnight culture (18-24h). Randomly selected positive blood cultures (PBC, n = 102) with gram-negative bacteria were included in the study. PBC were sub-cultured onto appropriate agar plates and AST by MicroScan was performed after 4 h of incubation and repeated after incubation for 18-24 h as standard. In a total of 1909 drug-strain pairs, the 4-h subculture approach showed a very high essential agreement (EA) (98.6%) and categorical agreement (CA) (97.1%) compared with the standard. The incidence of minor error (mE), major error (ME), very major error (VME), and adjusted very major error (aVME) was 1.1%, 0.4%, 12.9%, and 5.3%, respectively. In summary, the use of 4-h subcultures for resistance testing with the MicroScan offers a very reliable and easy to realize time saving when testing positive blood cultures with gram-negative bacteria.

Comparative study of antifungal susceptibility testing methods for clinical Candida albicans isolates

PurposeCandida albicans is the second most common cause of candidemia in Malaysia. The Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) broth microdilution method is the gold standard for determining its minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC); however, it is laborious and time-consuming. This study was conducted to evaluate the usefulness of alternative methods, namely Sensititre YeastOne (SYO), VITEK 2 system, and E-test for determining the MIC of clinical C. albicans isolates. Materials and methodsThe susceptibilities of 95 C. albicans isolates were compared between SYO, VITEK 2 system, and E-test with CLSI broth microdilution method. The categorical agreement (CA), essential agreement (EA), very major errors (VME), major errors (ME) and minor errors (MiE) were calculated. ResultsOur finding showed the CA varied for SYO from 96.8% to 100%, while the EA ranged from 91.6% to 100%. The SYO method showed 1.1% of VME and ME, and up to 3.2% of MiE. Next, the CA and EA ranges for the VITEK 2 system were 97.8%–100% and 23.2%–100%, respectively. In the VITEK 2 technique, 1.1% of VME were found. For the E-test, the CA varied from 83.2% to 100% while the EA ranged from 64.2% to 98.9%. The E-test method showed 1.1% of VME and up to 16.8% of MiE. ConclusionsIn conclusion, SYO and VITEK 2 (except flucytosine) could be potential alternatives to the CLSI broth microdilution method in determining the MIC of C. albicans.

Evaluation of the QMAC-dRAST System Version 2.5 for Rapid Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing of Gram-Negative Bacteria From Positive Blood Culture Broth and Subcultured Colony Isolates.

Rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) for bloodstream infections (BSIs) facilitates the optimization of antimicrobial therapy, preventing antimicrobial resistance and improving patient outcomes. QMAC-dRAST (QuantaMatrix Inc., Korea) is a rapid AST platform based on microfluidic chip technology that performs AST directly using positive blood culture broth (PBCB). This study evaluated the performance of QMAC-dRAST for Gram-negative bacteria using PBCB and subcultured colony isolates, comparing it with that of VITEK 2 (bioMérieux, France) using broth microdilution (BMD) as the reference method. We included 141 Gram-negative blood culture isolates from patients with BSI and 12 carbapenemase-producing clinical isolates of Enterobacterales spiked into blood culture bottles. QMAC-dRAST performance was evaluated using PBCB and colony isolates, whereas VITEK 2 and BMD were tested only on colony isolates. For PBCB, QMAC-dRAST achieved 92.1% categorical agreement (CA), 95.3% essential agreement (EA), with 1.8% very major errors (VMEs), 3.5% major errors (MEs), and 5.2% minor errors (mEs). With colony isolates, it exhibited 92.5% CA and 95.1% EA, with 2.0% VMEs, 3.2% MEs, and 4.8% mEs. VITEK 2 showed 94.1% CA and 96.0% EA, with 4.3% VMEs, 0.4% MEs, and 4.3% mEs. QMAC-dRAST yielded elevated error rates for specific antimicrobial agents, with high VMEs for carbapenems and aminoglycosides. The median time to result for QMAC-dRAST was 5.9 h for PBCB samples and 6.1 h for subcultured colony isolates. The QMAC-dRAST system demonstrated considerable strengths and comparable performance to the VITEK 2 system; however, challenges were discerned with specific antimicrobial agents, underlining a necessity for improvement.

Comparison of BD Phoenix and disk diffusion to broth microdilution for determining cefepime susceptibility among carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales.

There are increasing reports of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) that test as cefepime-susceptible (S) or susceptible-dose dependent (SDD). However, there are no data to compare the cefepime testing performance of BD Phoenix automated susceptibility system (BD Phoenix) and disk diffusion (DD) relative to reference broth microdilution (BMD) against carbapenemase-producing (CPblaKPC-CRE) and non-producing (non-CP CRE) isolates. Cefepime susceptibility results were interpreted according to CLSI M100Ed32. Essential agreement (EA), categorical agreement (CA), minor errors (miEs), major errors (MEs), and very major errors (VMEs) were calculated for BD Phoenix (NMIC-306 Gram-negative panel) and DD relative to BMD. Correlates were also analyzed by the error rate-bounded method. EA and CA for CPblaKPC-CRE isolates (n = 64) were <90% with BD Phoenix while among non-CP CRE isolates (n = 58), EA and CA were 96.6%, and 79.3%, respectively. CA was <90% with DD for both cohorts. No ME or VME was observed for either isolate cohort; however, miEs were >10% for CPblaKPC-CRE and non-CP CRE with BD Phoenix and DD tests. For error rate-bounded method, miEs were <40% for IHigh + 1 to ILow - 1 ranges for CPblaKPC-CRE and non-CP CRE with BD Phoenix. Regarding disk diffusion, miEs were unacceptable for all MIC ranges among CPblaKPC-CRE. For non-CP CRE isolates, only IHigh + 1 to ILow - 1 range was acceptable at 37.2%. Using this challenge set of genotypic-phenotypic discordant CRE, the BD Phoenix MICs and DD susceptibility results trended higher (toward SDD and resistant phenotypes) relative to reference BMD results yielding lower CA. These results were more prominent among CPblaKPC-CRE than non-CP CRE.

Performance of modified colistin broth disc elution vis-a-vis broth microdilution method for susceptibility testing of Enterobacterales

Objectives: Recently, Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) has approved colistin broth disc elution (CBDE) to be a supplemental test. This requires multiple discs and tubes to get the desired concentrations of colistin -1, 2, and 4 µg/mL and 10 mL volume of cation-adjusted Mueller–Hinton broth for a single isolate. The present study was aimed to evaluate the performance of CBDE in a microtiter plate format modified (mCBDE) with the reference method broth microdilution (BMD) for detection of colistin resistance in carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) isolates. Materials and Methods: One hundred and sixty non-duplicate clinical CRE isolates (May 2021–April 2022) were simultaneously subjected for BMD and mCBDE. For mCBDE, colistin 10 µg discs and Mueller–Hinton broth no-2 control cations were procured from HiMedia, Mumbai, and drug concentrations were prepared following CLSI-M100Ed31. Results of mCBDE were compared with reference BMD (Minimum inhibitory concentration [MIC] ≤2 µg/mL – intermediate and ≥4 µg/mL – resistant). Statistical Analysis: The performance of mCBDE was compared with BMD and expressed in terms of Categorical, essential agreement (EA), very major error (VME), and major error (ME). The sensitivity and specificity were calculated using Fisher’s contingency Table. Results: Of the 160 CRE isolates, 152 had exactly the same minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) in both the tests with four isolates having higher and four having lower colistin MIC by mCBDE, giving a major error of 2.1% and VME of 5.5%. Categorical and essential agreement of mCBDE were 97.5% and 98.7%, respectively. Conclusions: mCBDE is an easy, economical, and reliable alternative test for determining colistin susceptibility for CRE isolates. Further, large-scale study is needed to strengthen our observation.

Using the CLSI rAST breakpoints of Enterobacterales in positive blood cultures

ObjectivesThe objective of this study was to provide the clinic with rapid and accurate results of antimicrobial susceptibility testing for the treatment of patients with bloodstream infections. To achieve this, we applied the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) blood culture direct rapid antimicrobial susceptibility test (rAST) to assess the susceptibility of the most common Enterobacterales found in blood cultures. MethodsIn this study, we utilized the CLSI blood culture direct rapid antimicrobial susceptibility test to assess the susceptibility (rAST) of the most common Enterobacterales present in blood cultures. We chose this method for its simplicity in analysis, and our aim was to predict minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) using the rAST. As a benchmark, we assumed that Broth Macrodilution method (BMD) results were 100% accurate. For data evaluation, we employed the terms categorical agreement (CA), very major errors (VME), and major errors (ME). ResultsOur findings demonstrate that the CLSI rAST method is reliable for rapidly determining the in vitro susceptibility of Enterobacterales to common antimicrobial drugs in bloodstream infections. We achieved a concordance rate of 90% in classification within a 10-hour timeframe. We identified a total of 112 carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) strains, and there was no significant difference in the detection rate of CRE at 6, 10, and 16 hours. This suggests that CRE can be identified as early as 6 hours. ConclusionThe CLSI rAST is a valuable tool that can be utilized in clinical practice to quickly determine the susceptibility of Enterobacterales to antimicrobial drugs within 10 hours. This capability can greatly assist in the clinical management of patients with bloodstream infections.

In vitro activity of cefiderocol against carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii carrying various β-lactamase encoding genes

ObjectivesThis study aimed to determine the in vitro efficacy of cefiderocol in carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (CRAB) isolates and evaluate the disk-diffusion (DD) method as an alternative method to broth-microdilution (BMD).MethodsTotally 89 CRAB isolates were included. Cluster analysis was determined by Pulsed-Field Gel Electrophoresis (PFGE). Resistance genes; blaOXA−51, blaOXA−23, blaOXA−24, blaOXA−58,blaPER−1, blaNDM, blaIMP and mcr-1 were screened. Cefiderocol susceptibility testing was performed by both DD and BMD. Interpretation was made according to EUCAST and CLSI. Categorical agreement (CA), minor errors (mEs), major errors (MEs), and very major errors (VMEs) were determined.ResultsPFGE revealed 5 distinct pulsotypes; 86 of the isolates were extensively drug-resistant (XDR). All the isolates were negative for blaNDM, blaIMP, mcr-1, while positive for blaOXA−58 and blaOXA51. blaPER−1 was positive for 33.7%; blaOXA−23 for 74.2%; blaOXA−24 for 12.3%. According to CLSI, the MEs rate was 1.85%, mEs was 7.86% and there were no VMEs. According to EUCAST, MEs rate was 3.70%, there were no mEs and VMEs. CA was 91% for CLSI and 97.8% for EUCAST. MICs of cefiderocol against A. baumannii isolates ranged from 0.06 to > 128 mg/L, with MIC50 and MIC90 values of 0.5 and > 128 mg/L, respectively.ConclusionsCefiderocol susceptibility was 60.7% in CRAB isolates. MIC50, MIC90 of blaPER−1 positive and blaPER−1 negative groups were > 128/>128 and 0.25/>128 mg/L. A correlation between the presence of blaPER−1 and cefiderocol resistance was observed (p < 0.0001). Among colistin-resistant isolates, the presence of blaPER−1 was 47.1% and 75% of them were resistant to cefiderocol respectively.

Comparison of carbapenem MIC for NDM-producing Enterobacterales by different AST methods.

This study compared the performance of MIC test strip (ETEST), automated AST card (Vitek 2) and broth microdilution (BMD) in determining carbapenem susceptibility and MIC values of NDM-producing Enterobacterales. NDM-producing Enterobacterales recovered from clinical specimens were included. The presence of blaNDM was confirmed by PCR. Identification of bacterial isolates was done by MALDI-TOF. Phenotypic susceptibility to three carbapenems (ertapenem, imipenem and meropenem) was tested by BMD, ETEST and Vitek 2. MIC values were interpreted in accordance with CLSI M100 (2022 edition). Using BMD as the reference standard, the essential agreement (EA), categorical agreement (CA), very major error (VME) and major error (ME) rates were evaluated. Forty-seven NDM-producing Enterobacterales isolates were included, 44 of which were Escherichia coli. The EA of Vitek 2 was 97.9% for ertapenem, 25.5% for meropenem and 42.6% for imipenem. Using Vitek 2, there were 0% VMEs across all three carbapenems tested. The EA of ETEST was 53.2% for ertapenem, 55.3% for imipenem and 36.2% for meropenem. The rates of VMEs for ETEST were high too (ertapenem 8.5%, meropenem 36.2%, imipenem 26.1%). The MIC values obtained from Vitek 2 were consistently higher than those from BMD, while MICs from ETEST were consistently lower than those from BMD. The VME rate for ETEST was unacceptably high when BMD was used as the standard for comparison. Vitek 2 had acceptable EA and CA for ertapenem when BMD was used as the standard for comparison. For meropenem and imipenem, neither of the methods (ETEST, Vitek 2) showed acceptable EA and CA when compared with BMD.

Establishment and Evaluation of a Resazurin-Based Microdilution Assay for Microbial Sensitivity Test of Neisseria gonorrhoeae

To establish and evaluate a microbial sensitivity test method for Neisseria gonorrhoeae based on resazurin coloration. Based on the broth microdilution method, resazurin was added as a live bacteria indicator. WHO G, a WHO gonococcal reference strain, was used to optimize the incubation time for resazurin-stained bacteria and the color change was visually observed to obtain the results. Agar dilution method (the gold standard) and resazurin-based microdilution assay were used to determine the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of azithromycin, ceftriaxone, and spectinomycin for 3 reference strains and 32 isolates of Neisseria gonorrhoeae. The results were analyzed based on essential agreement (EA), which reflected the consistency of the MIC values, category agreement (CA), which reflected the consistency in the determination of drug resistance, intermediary, and sensitivity, very major error (VME), which reflected false sensitivity, and major error (ME), which reflected pseudo drug resistance, to evaluate the accuracy of resazurin-based microdilution assay as a microbial sensitivity test of of Neisseria gonorrhoeae. CA and EA rates≥90% and VME and ME rates≤3% were found to be the acceptable performance rates. The results obtained 6 hours after resazurin was added were consistent with those of the agar dilution method and the resazurin-based microdilution assay was established accordingly based on this parameter. The EA of resazurin-based microdilution assay for measuring the MIC results of azithromycin, ceftriaxone, and spectinomycin was 97.1%, 91.5%, and 94.3%, respectively, and the CA was 88.6%, 94.3%, and 94.3%, respectively. The VME was 0% for all three antibiotics, while the ME was 11.4%, 5.7%, and 5.7%, respectively. The resazurin-based microdilution assay established in this study showed good agreement with agar dilution method for measuring the MIC of antibiotics against Neisseria gonorrhoeae. Moreover, the sensitivity results of this method were highly reliable and could be easily obtained through naked eye observation. Nonetheless, the results of drug resistance should be treated with caution and the optimization of parameters should be continued.

Performance evaluation of Bruker UMIC® microdilution panel and disc diffusion to determine cefiderocol susceptibility in Enterobacterales, Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, Achromobacter xylosoxidans and Burkolderia species.

Cefiderocol susceptibility testing (AST) represents an open challenge for clinical microbiology. Herein, we evaluated the performance of the UMIC® Cefiderocol broth microdilution (BMD) test and disc diffusion on Gram-negative species. UMIC® Cefiderocol BMD test, disc diffusion and reference BMD were in parallel performed on a collection of 256 clinical isolates. Categorical agreement (CA), essential agreement (EA), bias, major errors (MEs) and very major errors (VMEs) were calculated for both AST methods. The UMIC® Cefiderocol BMD strip exhibited an EA < 90% (85.5%), a CA higher than 90% (93.7%) and a low number of VMEs (n = 4, 4.2%) and MEs (n = 12, 7.4%). UMIC® Cefiderocol identified 96.2% of the resistant isolates [Enterobacterales, (39/40); P. aeruginosa (19/19); A. xylosoxidans (5/6); S. maltophilia (5/6); Burkholderia spp. (8/8)]. Disc diffusion showed a high CA (from 94.9 to 100%) regardless of disc manufacturer in Enterobacterales, P. aeuroginosa, A. baumannii and S. maltophilia. However, high rates of results falling in the area of technical uncertainty (ATU) were observed in Enterobacterales (34/90, 37.8%) and P. aeruginosa (16/40, 40%). Disc diffusion showed a poor performance in A. xylosoxidans and Burkholderia spp. if PK/PD breakpoint was used (overall, 5/9 VMEs; in contrast, the use of P. aeruginosa-specific breakpoints resulted in 100% of CA with 24.6% of results in the ATU). In conclusion, disc diffusion and UMIC® Cefiderocol are valid methods for the determination of cefiderocol susceptibility. Given the high number of results in the ATU by disc diffusion, a combined use of both AST methods may represent a solution to overcome the challenge of cefiderocol susceptibility testing in routine microbiology laboratories.

Impact of Accelerated Antimicrobial Testing on Clinical Outcomes in Critically Ill Septicaemia Patients: A Prospective Observational Study form a Tertiary Care Centre in Andhra Pradesh, India

Introduction: Bloodstream infection is a major cause of mortality and morbidity worldwide. Timely reporting of blood culture results is of utmost importance for better patient outcomes. The recently introduced Rapid Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (RAST) method is poised to profoundly influence clinical outcomes. Aim: To compare the results of RAST with Standard Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (SAST) and evaluate the impact of RAST reporting on the clinical management of septicaemia patients. Materials and Methods: This prospective, observational study was conducted in the Department of Microbiology, Government Medical College, Kurnool, Andhra Pradesh, India from May 2021 to September 2022. All positive blood culture bottles with only a single morphotype in gram staining were further processed using the RAST method, followed by conventional identification and SAST. Categorical agreement and disagreement between the RAST and SAST results were compared, along with the difference in the time at which results were available. Results: Out of a total of 1,146 blood cultures received, 228 were flagged as positive. A total of 514 isolate and antimicrobial agent combinations were evaluated, of which 496 (96.5%) showed categorical agreement. Only 18 (3.5%) showed categorical disagreement, with the majority being Major Errors (ME) (1.56%), followed by Very Major Errors (VME) (0.97%) and minor Errors (mE) (0.97%). Conclusion: RAST results demonstrated strong concurrence with SAST results. RAST is affordable, fast, and flexible and can potentially lead to a considerably shortened time for AST results to reach the bedside of the patient. This enables rapid modifications and adjustments in antibiotic therapy, including both escalation and de-escalation.

Looking Beyond: Expanding the Utility of Cefazolin as a Surrogate Marker

For uncomplicated urinary tract infections caused by Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Proteus mirabilis, CLSI recommends the use of cefazolin as a surrogate marker for the oral third-generation cephalosporins cefpodoxime and cefdinir. However, they do not comment on cefixime, which has emerged as an alternate treatment option, especially in the pediatric population. Our aim is to determine whether the susceptibility results of cefazolin can predict susceptibility results to cefixime. We included 39 urinary isolates of Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Proteus mirabilis isolated from patients with uncomplicated urinary tract infections. On comparing cefazolin and cefixime susceptibilities, it was observed that there was a categorical agreement in 36/39 isolates (92.3%), with Major Errors (ME) seen in 3 isolates. There were no Very Major Errors (VME) or Minor Errors (mE). In all three occasions of discrepancies, the isolate was susceptible to cefixime but resistant to cefazolin. Thus, similar to the other third-generation oral cephalosporins, a susceptible cefazolin result indicates susceptibility to cefixime, but if the isolate is resistant to cefazolin, cefixime needs to be tested individually.