Ko Sun-Young, Chung Jae-Woo, Song Ah Jin, Yoon Nam-Surp, Sung Heungsup, Kim Mi-Na
Department of Laboratory Medicine, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.
Korean J Lab Med. 2009 Feb;29(1):35-40. doi: 10.3343/kjlm.2009.29.1.35.
Accurate and rapid detection of extended-spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBLs) is important in guiding proper antimicrobial therapy for infected patients. We evaluated the performance of MicroScan NegCombo Type 44 panel (Dade Behring, USA), which was developed to confirm ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae using ceftazidime/clavulanate and cefotaxime/clavulanate.
From August 30 to September 20, 2007, 206 non-duplicate clinical isolates, including 106 Escherichia coli, 81 Klebsiella pneumoniae, 11 Klebsiella oxytoca, and 8 Proteus mirabilis were subcultured and tested with Type 32 and Type 44 panels. The results were compared with those of the CLSI phenotypic confirmatory test (CLSI-PCT) and disk approximation test (DAT). Isolates not susceptible to cefotetan or flagged as "Possible ESBL, unable to interpret confirm test (Possible ESBL)" on Type 44 panel were tested with boronic acid disks to confirm AmpC beta-lactamases (AmpC) production.
Of the 206 isolates tested, 44 (21.4%) produced ESBL by CLSI-PCT or DAT, including 27 E. coli, 14 K. pneumoniae, 2 K. oxytoca, and 1 P. mirabilis. Thirty-eight isolates flagged as "Confirmed ESBL" on Type 44 panel were all confirmed as ESBL-producers. Of 14 K. pneumoniae flagged as "Possible ESBL", 6 were confirmed as ESBL and AmpC co-producers and 8 as AmpC-producers.
Type 44 panel showed an excellent performance in detecting ESBL-producing E. coli, Klebsiella spp., and P. mirabilis. When flagged as "Confirmed ESBL", no other confirmatory test was necessary to report as ESBL; however, "Possible ESBL" required a differential test for AmpC production.
准确快速地检测超广谱β-内酰胺酶(ESBLs)对于指导感染患者的合理抗菌治疗至关重要。我们评估了美国达德拜林公司研发的MicroScan NegCombo 44型鉴定板的性能,该鉴定板用于使用头孢他啶/克拉维酸和头孢噻肟/克拉维酸确认产ESBL的肠杆菌科细菌。
2007年8月30日至9月20日,对206株非重复临床分离株进行传代培养,并用32型和44型鉴定板进行检测,这些分离株包括106株大肠埃希菌、81株肺炎克雷伯菌、11株产酸克雷伯菌和8株奇异变形杆菌。将结果与CLSI表型确证试验(CLSI-PCT)和纸片扩散法(DAT)的结果进行比较。对头孢替坦不敏感或在44型鉴定板上标记为“可能产ESBL,无法解释确证试验结果(可能产ESBL)”的分离株,用硼酸纸片进行检测以确认AmpCβ-内酰胺酶(AmpC)的产生。
在检测的206株分离株中,44株(21.4%)通过CLSI-PCT或DAT检测产ESBL,其中包括27株大肠埃希菌、14株肺炎克雷伯菌、2株产酸克雷伯菌和1株奇异变形杆菌。在44型鉴定板上标记为“确证产ESBL”的38株分离株均被确认为产ESBL菌。在14株标记为“可能产ESBL”的肺炎克雷伯菌中,6株被确认为产ESBL和AmpC的双产菌,8株为产AmpC菌。
44型鉴定板在检测产ESBL的大肠埃希菌、克雷伯菌属和奇异变形杆菌方面表现出色。当标记为“确证产ESBL”时,无需进行其他确证试验即可报告为产ESBL;然而,“可能产ESBL”则需要进行AmpC产生的鉴别试验。