Zhao Zhichang, Lan Fangjun, Liu Maobai, Chen Weiyuan, Huang Liya, Lin Qili, Li Bin
Department of Pharmacy, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, Fujian 350001 China.
Department of Clinical Laboratory, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, 29 Xinquan Rd, Fuzhou, Fujian 350001 People's Republic of China.
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2017 Aug 1;6:77. doi: 10.1186/s13756-017-0235-7. eCollection 2017.
Automated systems (MicroScan WalkAway 96 Plus, Phoenix 100, and Vitek 2 Compact) are widely used in clinical laboratories nowadays. The aim of this study is to evaluate the performance of these three systems for susceptibility testing of aminoglycosides and fluoroquinolones against Carbapenem-resistant (CRE).
A total of 75 CRE isolates were used in this study. Quinolone resistance determinants (QRDs) (, , , , , , and ) and aminoglycoside resistance determinants (ARDs) (, , , , , , and ) of these CRE were screened by PCR. The MICs of aminoglycosides (gentamicin and amikacin) and fluoroquinolones (ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin) to CRE obtained with the automated systems were compared with the reference method (agar dilution method).
Totally, 97.3% (73/75) of CRE harbored QRDs. The gene was the most common QRD determinant identified in 68 (96.7%), followed by in 56 (74.7%), in 23 (30.7%), and in 2 (2.7%), respectively. 22.7% (17/75) of CRE harbored ARD determinants. , and were identified among these isolates in 6 (8.0%), 6 (8.0%) and 5 (6.7%), respectively. A total of 900 results were obtained in this study. Overall, the total error rate was 9.89%. Twenty-eight very major errors (3.11%), 22 major errors (2.44%) and 39 minor errors (4.33%) were identified against agar dilution method. The very major errors were almost evenly distributed between results for fluoroquinolones (2.89%) and aminoglycosides (3.33%), while the major errors and minor errors were more commonly found in the results of fluoroquinolones (3.11% and 6.44%, respectively) than aminoglycosides (1.78% and 2.22%, respectively).
Our study shows that testing difficulties in susceptibility testing do exist in automated systems. We suggest clinical laboratories using automated systems should consider using a second, independent antimicrobial susceptibility testing method to validate aminoglycosides and fluoroquinolones susceptibility.
自动化系统(MicroScan WalkAway 96 Plus、Phoenix 100和Vitek 2 Compact)如今在临床实验室中广泛使用。本研究的目的是评估这三种系统对耐碳青霉烯类肠杆菌科细菌(CRE)进行氨基糖苷类和氟喹诺酮类药物敏感性测试的性能。
本研究共使用了75株CRE分离株。通过PCR筛选这些CRE的喹诺酮类耐药决定簇(QRDs)(qnrA、qnrB、qnrC、qnrD、qnrS、aac(6')-Ib-cr、oqxA和oqxB)和氨基糖苷类耐药决定簇(ARDs)(armA、rmtA、rmtB、rmtC、rmtD、npmA、aac(3)-IIa和ant(2")-Ia)。将自动化系统检测到的氨基糖苷类(庆大霉素和阿米卡星)和氟喹诺酮类(环丙沙星和左氧氟沙星)对CRE的最低抑菌浓度(MIC)与参考方法(琼脂稀释法)进行比较。
总体而言,97.3%(73/75)的CRE携带QRDs。qnrS基因是最常见的QRD决定簇,在68株(96.7%)中被鉴定到,其次是qnrB在56株(74.7%)中,qnrA在23株(30.7%)中,qnrD在2株(2.7%)中。22.7%(17/75)的CRE携带ARD决定簇。在这些分离株中分别鉴定出armA、rmtB和rmtC在6株(8.0%)、6株(8.0%)和5株(6.7%)中。本研究共获得900个结果。总体而言,总错误率为9.89%。与琼脂稀释法相比,鉴定出28个非常重大错误(3.11%)、22个重大错误(2.44%)和39个微小错误(4.33%)。非常重大错误在氟喹诺酮类结果(2.89%)和氨基糖苷类结果(3.33%)之间几乎均匀分布,而重大错误和微小错误在氟喹诺酮类结果中(分别为3.11%和6.44%)比氨基糖苷类结果中(分别为1.78%和2.22%)更常见。
我们的研究表明自动化系统在药敏试验中确实存在检测困难。我们建议使用自动化系统的临床实验室应考虑使用第二种独立的抗菌药物敏感性测试方法来验证氨基糖苷类和氟喹诺酮类药物的敏感性。