1887

Abstract

The alarming rise in urinary tract infection (UTI) antimicrobial resistance has resulted from a combination of high prevalence, low specificity and the lack of a rapid, point-of-care (POC) antibiotic susceptibility test (AST), which has led to the overuse/inappropriate use of antibiotics.

This study aimed to evaluate the performance of a rapid POC phenotypic AST device in reporting susceptibility information within 2 h.

Instrument calibration was performed with model bacteria and fluorescent microbeads to determine the dynamic range and limit of detection for quantifying concentrations of bacteria and demonstrate the ability to rapidly differentiate susceptible and resistant model bacteria. We then evaluated 30 presumptive UTI-positive patient urine samples in a clinical pilot study using a panel of 5 common UTI antibiotics plus a growth control and compared our results to the hospital standard of care AST.

Our device was able to robustly detect and quantify bacteria concentrations from 50 to 10 colony-forming units (c.f.u.) ml. The high sensitivity of this measurement technique enabled the device to differentiate between susceptible and resistant model bacteria with 100 % specificity over a 2 h growth period. In the clinical pilot study, an overall categorical agreement (CA) of 90.7 % was observed (sensitivity=91.4 %, specificity=88.9 %, =97) with performance for individual drugs ranging from 85 % CA (ceftazidime) to 100 % (nitrofurantoin).

By reducing the typical timeframe for susceptibility testing from 2–3 days to 2 h, our POC phenotypic AST can provide critical information to clinicians prior to the administration of antibiotic therapy.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.001119
2019-12-17
2020-01-24
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Roca I, Akova M, Baquero F, Carlet J, Cavaleri M et al. The global threat of antimicrobial resistance: science for intervention. New Microbes New Infect 2015;6: 22– 29 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Frieden T. Antibiotic resistance threats in the United States. Broch - US Cent Dis Control Prev 2013
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bartlett JG, Gilbert DN, Spellberg B. Seven ways to preserve the miracle of antibiotics. Clin Infect Dis 2013;56: 1445– 1450 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Shah NS, Wright A, Bai GH, Barrera L, Boulahbal F et al. Worldwide emergence of extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis. Emerg Infect Dis 2007
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Wright PM, Seiple IB, Myers AG. The evolving role of chemical synthesis in antibacterial drug discovery. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2014;53: 8840– 8869 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Lushniak BD. Antibiotic resistance: a public health crisis. Public Health Rep 2017
    [Google Scholar]
  7. The White House Administration National action plan for combating antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Open Gov Natl Action Plans 2015
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Doern CD. The slow March toward rapid phenotypic antimicrobial susceptibility testing: are we there yet?. J Clin Microbiol 2018;56: e01999-17 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Nicolle LE. Urinary tract infection: traditional pharmacologic therapies. Dis Mon 2003;49: 111– 128 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Foxman B, Barlow R, D’Arcy H, Gillespie B, Sobel JD. Urinary tract infection: self-reported incidence and associated costs. Ann Epidemiol 2000
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Grigoryan L, Trautner BW, Gupta K. Diagnosis and management of urinary tract infections in the outpatient setting: a review. JAMA - J Am Med Assoc 2014
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Suskind AM, Saigal CS, Hanley JM, Lai J, Setodji CM et al. Incidence and management of uncomplicated recurrent urinary tract infections in a national sample of women in the United States. Urology 2016;90: 50– 55 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Kumar S, Dave A, Wolf B, Lerma EV, Sampath Kumar MD. Urinary tract infections. Disease-a-Month 2015;61: 45– 59 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Gupta K, Trautner BW. Diagnosis and management of recurrent urinary tract infections in non-pregnant women. BMJ 2013;346: f3140 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Walter LMJ, Devillé WL, Yzermans JC, Van Duijn NP, Bezemer D et al. The urine dipstick test useful to rule out infections. A meta-analysis of the accuracy. BMC Urol 2004
    [Google Scholar]
  16. van Belkum A, Dunne WM. Next-Generation antimicrobial susceptibility testing. J Clin Microbiol 2013;51: 2018– 2024 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Brown PD, Freeman A, Foxman B. Prevalence and predictors of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole resistance among uropathogenic Escherichia coli isolates in Michigan. Clin Infect Dis 2002
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Bard JD, Lee F. Why can’t we just use PCR? The role of genotypic versus phenotypic testing for antimicrobial resistance testing. Clin Microbiol Newsl 2018
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Nicolai E, Garau S, Favalli C, D’Agostini C, Gratton E et al. Evaluation of BiesseBioscreen as a new methodology for bacteriuria screening. New Microbiol 2014; ISSN: 11217138 495– 501
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Masters BR. Bennett JohnE, Dolin Raphael, Blaser MartinJ. (editors) Mandell, Douglas, and Bennett’s Principles and Practice of Infectious Diseases, 8th ed. ISBN: 13-978-1-4557-4801-3, Elsevier Saunders. Graefe’s Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2015
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Rules E. The European Committee on antimicrobial susceptibility testing. Breakpoint tables for interpretation of MICs and zone diameters. 2019
  22. Quintiliani R. Pharmacodynamics of antimicrobial agents : time-Dependent vs concentration-dependent killing. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Desease 2001
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Levison ME, Levison JH. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of antibacterial agents. Infect Dis Clin North Am 2009;23: 791– 815 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Mouton JW, Brown DFJ, Apfalter P, Cantón R, Giske CG et al. The role of pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics in setting clinical MIC breakpoints: the EUCAST approach. Clin Microbiol Infect 2012;18: E37– E45 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Avesar J, Rosenfeld D, Truman-Rosentsvit M, Ben-Arye T, Geffen Y et al. Rapid phenotypic antimicrobial susceptibility testing using nanoliter arrays. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2017;114: E5787– E5795 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Matlock BC, Beringer RW, Ash DL, Allen MW, Page AF. Analyzing differences in bacterial optical density measurements between Spectrophotometers. 2017
  27. Koch AL. Turbidity measurements of bacterial cultures in some available commercial instruments. Anal Biochem 1970;38: 252 259 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Schmiemann G, Kniehl E, Gebhardt K, Matejczyk MM, Hummers-Pradier E. The diagnosis of urinary tract infection: a systematic review. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2010;107: 361– 367 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Skinner JP, Swift KM, Ruan Q, Perfetto S, Gratton E et al. Simplified confocal microscope for counting particles at low concentrations. Rev Sci Instrum 2013;84: 074301 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Altamore I, Lanzano L, Gratton E. Dual channel detection of ultra low concentration of bacteria in real time by scanning fluorescence correlation spectroscopy. Meas Sci Technol 2013
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Fastidious HDJ. And Furious: reporting antimicrobial susceptibility testing for fastidious or infrequently isolated bacteria. Clin Microbiol Newsl 2017
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Hombach M, Maurer FP, Pfiffner T, Böttger EC, Furrer R. Standardization of Operator-Dependent variables affecting precision and accuracy of the disk diffusion method for antibiotic susceptibility testing. J Clin Microbiol 2015
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Carroll KC, Glanz BD, Borek AP, Burger C, Bhally HS et al. Evaluation of the BD Phoenix automated microbiology system for identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Enterobacteriaceae. J Clin Microbiol 2006
    [Google Scholar]
  34. McGregor A, Schio F, Beaton S, Boulton V, Perman M et al. The MicroScan WalkAway diagnostic microbiology system--an evaluation. Pathology 1995;27: 172– 176 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Joyanes P, del Carmen Conejo M, Martínez-Martínez L, Perea EJ. Evaluation of the Vitek 2 system for the identification and susceptibility testing of three species of nonfermenting gram-negative rods frequently isolated from clinical samples. J Clin Microbiol 2001;39: 3247 3253 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Hombach M, Ochoa C, Maurer FP, Pfiffner T, Böttger EC et al. Relative contribution of biological variation and technical variables to zone diameter variations of disc diffusion susceptibility testing. J Antimicrob Chemother 2016;71: 141– 151 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Stamm WE. An epidemic of urinary tract infections?. N Engl J Med 2002
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Gupta K, Hooton TM, Stamm WE. Increasing antimicrobial resistance and the management of uncomplicated community-acquired urinary tract infections. Ann Intern Med 2001
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Shahidi A, Ellner PD. Effect of mixed cultures. Appl Microbiol
    [Google Scholar]
  40. George DB, Manges AR. A systematic review of outbreak and non-outbreak studies of extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli causing community-acquired infections. Epidemiol Infect 2010;138: 1679– 1690 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.001119
Loading
/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.001119
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplements

Supplementary material 1

PDF
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error