663. Improved Detection of ESBL and AmpC Beta-Lactamase Producing Isolates of Enterobacteriaceae in Pediatric Patients with Bloodstream Infections Using Combined Genotypic and Phenotypic Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing

BACKGROUND: Infections secondary to pathogens resistant to third-generation cephalosporins (3GC), such as extended-spectrum (ESBL) and AmpC β-lactamase (AmpC) producing Enterobacteriaceae, are increasing. Currently, there are no recommendations regarding identification of AmpC in Citrobacter, Enterobacter, Morganella and Serratia spp. (CEMS organisms). This study’s aim was to increase the detection of AmpC and ESBL producing Enterobacteriaceae in blood cultures from pediatric population by combining genotypic with phenotypic antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST). METHODS: All first time Enterobacteriaceae isolates recovered from blood cultures of pediatric patients at CCHMC between January 2017 and December 2018 were evaluated. The Check-MDR CT103XL assay was used to determine the presence of AmpC and ESBL. AST was performed using the Vitek 2 platform. Phenotypic ESBL resistance was defined by resistant to either ceftriaxone of ceftazidime using CLSI breakpoints. Combined cefoxitin resistance with ceftriaxone or ceftazidime resistance was used to define phenotypic AmpC (EUCAST standards). RESULTS: There were 170 isolates, from 147 patients, with 21 (12.4%) AmpC and 18 (10.6%) ESBL genes detected. Using AST, 11 (6.5%) and 26 (15.3%) isolates met AmpC and ESBL phenotypic criteria respectively. However, 14 of the isolates with AmpC genes detected and 2 of isolates with ESBL genes detected failed to meet phenotypic criteria. In addition, 4 (19%) of 21 AmpC isolates were susceptible to cefoxitin and 3GC while both E. coli and S. marcescens genotypic ESBL isolates were susceptible to 3GC. Number of AmpC- and ESBL- Producing Isolates Detected Using Phenotypic Method a,b, Genotypic Method and Combined Testing [Image: see text] CONCLUSION: We identified 16 (9.4%) isolates with resistance genes detected but that failed to meet phenotypic criteria. Without molecular testing, patients with these isolates may have been treated with 3GC which could have resulted in treatment failure. The addition of genotypic testing to AST improved the identification of AmpC and ESBL organisms and provided clinically relevant data to guide treatment of resistant organisms. Combined testing is also beneficial for infection control and epidemiological purposes. DISCLOSURES: All Authors: No reported disclosures