Applicability and performance of EUCAST’s rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing (RAST) on primarily sterile body fluids in blood culture bottles in laboratory routine with total lab automation

被引:0
作者
Jasmin Kaur Jasuja
Stefan Zimmermann
Irene Burckhardt
机构
[1] University Hospital Heidelberg,Department for Infectious Diseases
来源
European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases | 2021年 / 40卷
关键词
RAST; EUCAST; Primarily sterile body fluids; Blood cultures; TLA;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Optimisation of microbiological diagnostics in primarily sterile body fluids is required. Our objective was to apply EUCAST’s RAST on primarily sterile body fluids in blood culture bottles with total lab automation (TLA) and to compare results to our reference method Vitek2 in order to report susceptibility results earlier. Positive blood culture bottles (BACTEC™ Aerobic/Anaerobic/PEDS) inoculated with primarily sterile body fluids were semi-automatically subcultured onto Columbia 5% SB agar, chocolate agar, MacConkey agar, Schaedler/KV agar and Mueller-Hinton agar. On latter, cefoxitin, ampicillin, vancomycin, piperacillin/tazobactam, meropenem and ciprofloxacin were added. After 6 h, subcultures and RAST were imaged and MALDI-TOF MS was performed. Zone sizes were digitally measured and interpreted following RAST breakpoints for blood cultures. MIC values were determined using Vitek2 panels. During a 1-year period, 197 Staphylococcus aureus, 91 Enterococcus spp., 38 Escherichia coli, 11 Klebsiella pneumoniae and 8 Pseudomonas aeruginosa were found. Categorical agreement between RAST and MIC was 96.5%. Comparison showed no very major errors, 2/7 (28.6%) and 1/7 (14.3%) of major errors for P. aeruginosa and meropenem and ciprofloxacin, 1/9 (11.1%) for K. pneumoniae and ciprofloxacin, 4/69 (7.0%) and 3/43 (5.8%) for Enterococcus spp. and vancomycin and ampicillin, respectively. Minor errors for P. aeruginosa and meropenem (1/8; 12.8%) and for E. coli and ciprofloxacin (2/29; 6.5%) were found. 30/550 RAST measurements were within area of technical uncertainty. RAST is applicable and performs well for primarily sterile body fluids in blood culture bottles, partially better than blood-based RAST. Official EUCAST evaluation is needed.
引用
收藏
页码:1217 / 1225
页数:8
相关论文
共 54 条
[1]  
Alfa MJ(1997)Improved detection of bacterial growth in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis effluent by use of BacT/Alert FAN bottles J Clin Microbiol 35 862-866
[2]  
Degagne P(1989)Improved method for bacteriological diagnosis of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis J Clin Microbiol 27 2145-2147
[3]  
Olson N(2011)Blood culture bottle culture of pleural fluid in pleural infection Thorax. 66 658-662
[4]  
Harding GK(2017)Microbiological trends and antimicrobial resistance in peritoneal dialysis-related peritonitis, 2005 to 2014 Perit Dial Int 37 170-176
[5]  
Bobadilla M(2015)Microbiological surveillance of peritoneal dialysis associated peritonitis: antimicrobial susceptibility profiles of a referral center in Germany over 32 years PloS One 10 e0135969-e013596e
[6]  
Sifuentes J(2016)Rapid identification and multiple susceptibility testing of pathogens from positive-culture sterile body fluids by a combined MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry and Vitek susceptibility system Front Microbiol 7 523-4
[7]  
Garcia-Tsao G(2013)The performance of 4 different supplements and 5 blood culture bottles types in detection of bacteria and Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 77 1-642
[8]  
Menzies SM(2020). in simulated sterile body fluid cultures J Glob Antimicrob Resist. 22 637-1102
[9]  
Rahman NM(2016)Rapid antimicrobial susceptibility of Enterobacteriaceae by disk diffusion directly from blood culture bottles using the EUCAST RAST breakpoints J Antimicrob Chemother 72 1094-637
[10]  
Wrightson JM(2017)Rapid EUCAST disc diffusion testing of MDR Int J Antimicrob Agents. 49 631-357