首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Clinical Microbiology >Comparison of Meropenem MICs and Susceptibilities for Carbapenemase-Producing Klebsiella pneumoniae Isolates by Various Testing Methods
【24h】

Comparison of Meropenem MICs and Susceptibilities for Carbapenemase-Producing Klebsiella pneumoniae Isolates by Various Testing Methods

机译:多种测试方法比较美罗培南MICs和生产碳青霉烯酶的肺炎克雷伯菌的敏感性

获取原文
           

摘要

We describe the levels of agreement between broth microdilution, Etest, Vitek 2, Sensititre, and MicroScan methods to accurately define the meropenem MIC and categorical interpretation of susceptibility against carbapenemase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae (KPC). A total of 46 clinical K. pneumoniae isolates with KPC genotypes, all modified Hodge test and blaKPC positive, collected from two hospitals in NY were included. Results obtained by each method were compared with those from broth microdilution (the reference method), and agreement was assessed based on MICs and Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) interpretative criteria using 2010 susceptibility breakpoints. Based on broth microdilution, 0%, 2.2%, and 97.8% of the KPC isolates were classified as susceptible, intermediate, and resistant to meropenem, respectively. Results from MicroScan demonstrated the most agreement with those from broth microdilution, with 95.6% agreement based on the MIC and 2.2% classified as minor errors, and no major or very major errors. Etest demonstrated 82.6% agreement with broth microdilution MICs, a very major error rate of 2.2%, and a minor error rate of 2.2%. Vitek 2 MIC agreement was 30.4%, with a 23.9% very major error rate and a 39.1% minor error rate. Sensititre demonstrated MIC agreement for 26.1% of isolates, with a 3% very major error rate and a 26.1% minor error rate. Application of FDA breakpoints had little effect on minor error rates but increased very major error rates to 58.7% for Vitek 2 and Sensititre. Meropenem MIC results and categorical interpretations for carbapenemase-producing K. pneumoniae differ by methodology. Confirmation of testing results is encouraged when an accurate MIC is required for antibiotic dosing optimization.
机译:我们描述了肉汤微稀释,Etest,Vitek 2,Sensititre和MicroScan方法之间的一致性水平,以准确定义美罗培南MIC和对产生碳青霉烯酶的肺炎克雷伯菌肺炎(KPC)敏感性的分类解释。共有46个临床 K。包括从纽约州两家医院收集的,具有KPC基因型,所有改良的霍奇检验和 bla KPC 阳性的肺炎克雷伯菌分离株。将每种方法获得的结果与肉汤微量稀释(参考方法)获得的结果进行比较,并根据MIC和临床实验室标准协会(CLSI)的解释性标准,使用2010年的敏感性折点评估协议。基于肉汤微量稀释,分别将0%,2.2%和97.8%的KPC分离株分为美洛培南敏感,中等和抗美罗培南。 MicroScan的结果与肉汤微量稀释的结果最一致,基于MIC的结果为95.6%,轻微错误的比率为2.2%,没有重大或非常重大的错误。 Etest与肉汤微量稀释MIC达成82.6%的一致性,非常大的错误率为2.2%,次要错误率为2.2%。 Vitek 2 MIC同意率为30.4%,非常严重的错误率为23.9%,次要错误率为39.1%。 Sensititre证明了26.1%分离株的MIC一致性,主要错误率3%,次要错误率26.1%。使用FDA断点对次要错误率影响不大,但Vitek 2和Sensititre的非常主要错误率提高到58.7%。 Meropenem MIC结果和产生碳青霉烯酶的 K的分类解释。肺炎在方法上有所不同。当需要精确的MIC来优化抗生素剂量时,鼓励确认测试结果。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号