False non-susceptible results of tigecycline susceptibility testing against Enterobacteriaceae by an automated system: a multicentre study

References

1. Bradford P. A., Petersen P. J., Young M., Jones C. H., Tischler M., O'Connell J. 2005; Tigecycline MIC testing by broth dilution requires use of fresh medium or addition of the biocatalytic oxygen-reducing reagent oxyrase to standardize the test method. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 49:3903–3909 [View Article][PubMed]
   [Google Scholar]
2. Cohen Stuart J., Mouton J. W., Diederen B. M., Al Naiemi N., Thijsen S., Vlaminckx B. J., Fluit A. C., Leverstein-van Hall M. A. 2010; Evaluation of Etest to determine tigecycline MICs for Enterobacter species. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 54:2746–2747 [View Article][PubMed]
   [Google Scholar]
3. Fernández-Mazarrasa C., Mazarrasa O., Calvo J., Del Arco A., Martínez-Martínez L. 2009; High concentrations of manganese in Mueller-Hinton agar increase MICs of tigecycline determined by Etest. J Clin Microbiol 47:827–829 [View Article][PubMed]
   [Google Scholar]
4. Hope R., Mushtaq S., James D., Pllana T., Warner M., Livermore D. M.Tigecycline Susceptibility Testing Group 2010; Tigecycline activity: low resistance rates but problematic disc breakpoints revealed by a multicentre sentinel survey in the UK. J Antimicrob Chemother 65:2602–2609 [View Article][PubMed]
   [Google Scholar]
5. Huang T. D., Berhin C., Bogaerts P., Glupczynski Y. 2012; In vitro susceptibility of multidrug-resistant Enterobacteriaceae clinical isolates to tigecycline. J Antimicrob Chemother 67:2696–2699 [View Article][PubMed]
   [Google Scholar]
6. ISO 2006; 20776-1. Clinical laboratory testing and in vitro diagnostic test systems − Susceptibility testing of infectious agents and evaluation of performance of antimicrobial susceptibility test devices − Part 1: Reference method for testing the in vitro activity of antimicrobial agents against rapidly growing aerobic bacteria involved in infectious diseases. International Organization for Standardization. Geneva, Switzerland:
7. ISO 2007; 20776-2. Clinical laboratory testing and in vitro diagnostic test systems − Susceptibility testing of infectious agents and evaluation of performance of antimicrobial susceptibility test devices − Part 2: evaluation of performance of antimicrobial susceptibility test devices. International Organization for Standardization. Geneva, Switzerland:
8. Lat A., Clock S. A., Wu F., Whittier S., Della-Latta P., Fauntleroy K., Jenkins S. G., Saiman L., Kubin C. J. 2011; Comparison of polymyxin B, tigecycline, cefepime, and meropenem MICs for KPC-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae by broth microdilution, Vitek 2, and Etest. J Clin Microbiol 49:1795–1798 [View Article][PubMed]
   [Google Scholar]
9. Leal Castro A. L., Buitrago Gutierrez G., Ovalle V., Cortes J. A., Alvarez C. A.Colombian Tigecycline Susceptibility Surveillance Group 2010; Comparing in vitro activity of tigecycline by using the disk diffusion test, the manual microdilution method, and the VITEK 2 automated system. Rev Argent Microbiol 42:208–211[PubMed]
   [Google Scholar]
10. Marchaim D., Pogue J. M., Tzuman O., Hayakawa K., Lephart P. R., Salimnia H., Painter T., Zervos M. J., Johnson L. E. et al. 2014; Major variation in MICs of tigecycline in gram-negative bacilli as a function of testing method. J Clin Microbiol 52:1617–1621 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
11. The European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing 2012a Breakpoint tables for interpretation of MICs and zone diameters. Version 2.0 http://www.eucast.org
12. The European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing 2012b EUCAST Disk Diffusion Method for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. Version 2.1 http://www.eucast.org
13. Torrico M., González N., Giménez M. J., Alou L., Sevillano D., Navarro D., Díaz-Antolín M. P., Larrosa N., Aguilar L. et al. 2010; Influence of media and testing methodology on susceptibility to tigecycline of Enterobacteriaceae with reported high tigecycline MIC. J Clin Microbiol 48:2243–2246 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
14. Ullery M. 2006; Are VITEK^® 2 MICs "Real" MICs?. bioMérieux Connection 3:1–5
    [Google Scholar]
15. Zarkotou O., Pournaras S., Altouvas G., Pitiriga V., Tziraki M., Mamali V., Themeli-Digalaki K., Tsakris A. 2012; Comparative evaluation of tigecycline susceptibility testing methods for expanded-spectrum cephalosporin- and carbapenem-resistant gram-negative pathogens. J Clin Microbiol 50:3747–3750 [View Article][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]