1887

Abstract

Bloodstream infections are life-threatening conditions which require timely initiation of appropriate antimicrobial therapy. The accuracy of direct disk diffusion susceptibility testing of positive blood cultures was investigated, including for the first time -lactam/-lactam-inhibitor combination antibiotics. Results of direct testing, following the guidelines of the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, were compared to standard microtitre broth dilution susceptibility testing of the subcultured isolate on the Merlin MICRONAUT system. Altogether, 758 isolates and 4930 organism/antibiotic combinations from 590 patients were evaluated. With regard to Gram-positive cocci (=532), agreement between both methods was found in 93.9 % of cases, with 1.6 % very major, 1.1 % major and 2.6 % minor errors. For Gram-negative rods (=226), agreement was found in 91.9 % of cases, with 1.2 % very major, 0.7 % major and 6.3 % minor errors. When applying the breakpoints of the Deutsches Institut für Normung for interpretation of MICRONAUT tests, agreement of direct disk diffusion with standard testing decreased to 82.4 % in Gram-negative rods, with 3.6 % very major, 0.5 % major and 13.4 % minor errors. A high rate of disagreement was observed with oxacillin and gentamicin in Gram-positive cocci, and with cefuroxime, amoxycillin/clavulanate and piperacillin/tazobactam in Gram-negative rods. In conclusion, the limitations of direct disk diffusion testing of positive blood cultures must be kept in mind by the clinical microbiologist and should, where necessary, be communicated to the clinician to ensure adequate treatment of severely ill patients.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.46937-0
2007-02-01
2020-01-22
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jmm/56/2/202.html?itemId=/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.46937-0&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Barenfanger, J., Drake, C. & Kacich, G. ( 1999; ). Clinical and financial benefits of rapid bacterial identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing. J Clin Microbiol 37, 1415–1418.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Baron, E. J., Weinstein, M. P., Dume, W. M., Yagupsky, P., Welch, D. F. & Wilson, D. M. ( 2005; ). Cumitech 1C: Blood Cultures IV. Washington, DC: American Society of Microbiology.
  3. Bruins, M. J., Bloembergen, P., Ruijs, G. J. & Wolfhagen, M. J. ( 2004; ). Identification and susceptibility testing of Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa by direct inoculation from positive BACTEC blood culture bottles into Vitek 2. J Clin Microbiol 42, 7–11.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  4. CLSI ( 2005; ). Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing, approved standard M100-S15. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute.
  5. Coyle, M. B., McGonagle, L. A., Plorde, J. J., Clausen, C. R. & Schoenknecht, F. D. ( 1984; ). Rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing of isolates from blood cultures by direct inoculation and early reading of disk diffusion tests. J Clin Microbiol 20, 473–477.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. de Cueto, M., Ceballos, E., Martinez-Martinez, L., Perea, E. J. & Pascual, A. ( 2004; ). Use of positive blood cultures for direct identification and susceptibility testing with the Vitek 2 system. J Clin Microbiol 42, 3734–3738.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  7. DIN ( 2002; ). Empfindlichkeitsprüfung von mikrobiellen Krankheitserregern gegen Chemotherapeutika. DIN 58940.
  8. Diederen, B. M., Zieltjens, M., Wetten, H. & Buiting, A. G. ( 2006; ). Identification and susceptibility testing of Staphylococcus aureus by direct inoculation from positive BACTEC blood culture bottles. Clin Microbiol Infect 12, 84–86.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Doern, G. V., Scott, D. R., Rashad, A. L. & Kim, K. S. ( 1981; ). Evaluation of a direct blood culture disk diffusion antimicrobial susceptibility test. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 20, 696–698.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Doern, G. V., Vautour, R., Gaudet, M. & Levy, B. ( 1994; ). Clinical impact of rapid in vitro susceptibility testing and bacterial identification. J Clin Microbiol 32, 1757–1762.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Fay, D. & Oldfather, J. E. ( 1979; ). Standardization of direct susceptibility test for blood cultures. J Clin Microbiol 9, 347–350.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Funke, G. & Funke-Kissling, P. ( 2004; ). Use of the BD PHOENIX Automated Microbiology System for direct identification and susceptibility testing of gram-negative rods from positive blood cultures in a three-phase trial. J Clin Microbiol 42, 1466–1470.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Hansen, D. S., Jensen, A. G., Norskov-Lauritsen, N., Skov, R. & Bruun, B. ( 2002; ). Direct identification and susceptibility testing of enteric bacilli from positive blood cultures using VITEK (GNI+/GNS-GA). Clin Microbiol Infect 8, 38–44.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Harbarth, S., Garbino, J., Pugin, J., Romand, J. A., Lew, D. & Pittet, D. ( 2003; ). Inappropriate initial antimicrobial therapy and its effect on survival in a clinical trial of immunomodulating therapy for severe sepsis. Am J Med 115, 529–535.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Johnson, J. E. & Washington, J. A. ( 1976; ). Comparison of direct and standardized antimicrobial susceptibility testing of positive blood cultures. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 10, 211–214.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Jorgensen, J. H. ( 1993; ). Selection criteria for an antimicrobial susceptibility testing system. J Clin Microbiol 31, 2841–2844.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Kollef, M. H., Sherman, G., Ward, S. & Fraser, V. J. ( 1999; ). Inadequate antimicrobial treatment of infections: a risk factor for hospital mortality among critically ill patients. Chest 115, 462–474.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Mirrett, S. ( 1994; ). Antimicrobial susceptibility testing and blood cultures. Clin Lab Med 14, 171–179.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Mirrett, S. & Reller, L. B. ( 1979; ). Comparison of direct and standard antimicrobial disk susceptibility testing for bacteria isolated from blood. J Clin Microbiol 10, 482–487.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Seifert, H., Shah, P., Ullmann, U., Trautmann, M. & Briedigkeit, P. ( 1997; ). Sepsis – Blutkulturdiagnostik. In Mikrobiologisch-Infektiologische Qualitätsstandard (MIQ), pp. 23–24. Edited by H. Mauch, R. Lütticken & S. Gatermann. München: Urban & Fischer.
  21. Waites, K. B., Brookings, E. S., Moser, S. A. & Zimmer, B. L. ( 1998; ). Direct susceptibility testing with positive BacT/Alert blood cultures by using MicroScan overnight and rapid panels. J Clin Microbiol 36, 2052–2056.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Wegner, D. L., Mathis, C. R. & Neblett, T. R. ( 1976; ). Direct method to determine the antibiotic susceptibility of rapidly growing blood pathogens. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 9, 861–862.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Wisplinghoff, H., Bischoff, T., Tallent, S. M., Seifert, H., Wenzel, R. P. & Edmond, M. B. ( 2004; ). Nosocomial bloodstream infections in US hospitals: analysis of 24,179 cases from a prospective nationwide surveillance study. Clin Infect Dis 39, 309–317.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.46937-0
Loading
/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.46937-0
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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