Cargando…

Comparative Evaluation of Seven Tigecycline Susceptibility Testing Methods for Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae

PURPOSE: Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) strains are extensively resistant to most antibiotics. Tigecycline is one of the few effective drugs that can be used to treat infections caused by CRE. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of different methods for detecting the su...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Hongling, Zhou, Mao, Chen, Xia, Zhang, Yawen, Jian, Zijuan, Yan, Qun, Liu, Wen-En
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8068477/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33907429
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S289499
_version_ 1783683036654600192
author Li, Hongling
Zhou, Mao
Chen, Xia
Zhang, Yawen
Jian, Zijuan
Yan, Qun
Liu, Wen-En
author_facet Li, Hongling
Zhou, Mao
Chen, Xia
Zhang, Yawen
Jian, Zijuan
Yan, Qun
Liu, Wen-En
author_sort Li, Hongling
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) strains are extensively resistant to most antibiotics. Tigecycline is one of the few effective drugs that can be used to treat infections caused by CRE. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of different methods for detecting the susceptibility of CRE to tigecycline. METHODS: Seven commonly used drug susceptibility testing methods were compared and evaluated for the ability to determine CRE tigecycline susceptibility: broth microdilution (BMD), agar dilution method (ADM), disk diffusion method, Etest, MicroScan, Vitek2 COMPACT, and BD Phoenix 100. RESULTS: The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of tigecycline to inhibit 50% and 90% of CRE growth (MIC(50) and MIC(90), respectively) assessed by ADM and BD Phoenix 100 was the same as that determined by the reference method, BMD. The MIC(50) was 2 µg/mL, and the MIC(90) was 4 µg/mL. The highest number of susceptible strains was detected by MicroScan, followed by BMD, Etest, ADM, BD Phoenix 100, Vitek2 COMPACT, and disk diffusion method, in descending order. No significant differences were observed among the tigecycline susceptibility results (P > 0.05) obtained from MicroScan, Etest, BD Phoenix 100, and BMD. BMD confirmed that 82.0% of strains were susceptible to tigecycline. ADM, MicroScan, and BD Phoenix 100 yielded the categorical agreement of 96%, 92%, and 93%, respectively. No method was found to present any very major errors (VMEs), and only the Vitek2 COMPACT yielded major errors (MEs) greater than 3%. CONCLUSION: Among the seven methods tested, the ADM, MicroScan, and BD Phoenix 100 methods were accurate for determining the tigecycline susceptibility of CRE. MicroScan was acceptable with better performance than other methods.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8068477
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Dove
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80684772021-04-26 Comparative Evaluation of Seven Tigecycline Susceptibility Testing Methods for Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae Li, Hongling Zhou, Mao Chen, Xia Zhang, Yawen Jian, Zijuan Yan, Qun Liu, Wen-En Infect Drug Resist Original Research PURPOSE: Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) strains are extensively resistant to most antibiotics. Tigecycline is one of the few effective drugs that can be used to treat infections caused by CRE. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of different methods for detecting the susceptibility of CRE to tigecycline. METHODS: Seven commonly used drug susceptibility testing methods were compared and evaluated for the ability to determine CRE tigecycline susceptibility: broth microdilution (BMD), agar dilution method (ADM), disk diffusion method, Etest, MicroScan, Vitek2 COMPACT, and BD Phoenix 100. RESULTS: The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of tigecycline to inhibit 50% and 90% of CRE growth (MIC(50) and MIC(90), respectively) assessed by ADM and BD Phoenix 100 was the same as that determined by the reference method, BMD. The MIC(50) was 2 µg/mL, and the MIC(90) was 4 µg/mL. The highest number of susceptible strains was detected by MicroScan, followed by BMD, Etest, ADM, BD Phoenix 100, Vitek2 COMPACT, and disk diffusion method, in descending order. No significant differences were observed among the tigecycline susceptibility results (P > 0.05) obtained from MicroScan, Etest, BD Phoenix 100, and BMD. BMD confirmed that 82.0% of strains were susceptible to tigecycline. ADM, MicroScan, and BD Phoenix 100 yielded the categorical agreement of 96%, 92%, and 93%, respectively. No method was found to present any very major errors (VMEs), and only the Vitek2 COMPACT yielded major errors (MEs) greater than 3%. CONCLUSION: Among the seven methods tested, the ADM, MicroScan, and BD Phoenix 100 methods were accurate for determining the tigecycline susceptibility of CRE. MicroScan was acceptable with better performance than other methods. Dove 2021-04-20 /pmc/articles/PMC8068477/ /pubmed/33907429 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S289499 Text en © 2021 Li et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) ). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).
spellingShingle Original Research
Li, Hongling
Zhou, Mao
Chen, Xia
Zhang, Yawen
Jian, Zijuan
Yan, Qun
Liu, Wen-En
Comparative Evaluation of Seven Tigecycline Susceptibility Testing Methods for Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae
title Comparative Evaluation of Seven Tigecycline Susceptibility Testing Methods for Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae
title_full Comparative Evaluation of Seven Tigecycline Susceptibility Testing Methods for Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae
title_fullStr Comparative Evaluation of Seven Tigecycline Susceptibility Testing Methods for Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae
title_full_unstemmed Comparative Evaluation of Seven Tigecycline Susceptibility Testing Methods for Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae
title_short Comparative Evaluation of Seven Tigecycline Susceptibility Testing Methods for Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae
title_sort comparative evaluation of seven tigecycline susceptibility testing methods for carbapenem-resistant enterobacteriaceae
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8068477/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33907429
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S289499
work_keys_str_mv AT lihongling comparativeevaluationofseventigecyclinesusceptibilitytestingmethodsforcarbapenemresistantenterobacteriaceae
AT zhoumao comparativeevaluationofseventigecyclinesusceptibilitytestingmethodsforcarbapenemresistantenterobacteriaceae
AT chenxia comparativeevaluationofseventigecyclinesusceptibilitytestingmethodsforcarbapenemresistantenterobacteriaceae
AT zhangyawen comparativeevaluationofseventigecyclinesusceptibilitytestingmethodsforcarbapenemresistantenterobacteriaceae
AT jianzijuan comparativeevaluationofseventigecyclinesusceptibilitytestingmethodsforcarbapenemresistantenterobacteriaceae
AT yanqun comparativeevaluationofseventigecyclinesusceptibilitytestingmethodsforcarbapenemresistantenterobacteriaceae
AT liuwenen comparativeevaluationofseventigecyclinesusceptibilitytestingmethodsforcarbapenemresistantenterobacteriaceae