CHU de Rennes, Service de Bactériologie et Hygiène Hospitalière, Rennes, France.
U1230 'ARN régulateurs Bactériens et Médecine', Université Rennes 1, Rennes, France.
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2020 Sep 1;75(9):2587-2593. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkaa180.
Linezolid-resistant enterococci (LRE) causing infections that are challenging to treat are rising, highlighting the need for reliable screening of LRE clinical isolates.
To evaluate the ability of the broth microdilution (BMD) method for LRE detection and to assess the performance of seven commercially available techniques for linezolid susceptibility testing.
A collection of 100 clinical isolates (80 Enterococcus faecium and 20 Enterococcus faecalis), including 20 optrA-positive isolates, 17 poxtA-positive isolates and 1 optrA/poxtA-positive E. faecium isolate, were studied. MICs were determined after 18 h [Day 1 (D1)] and 42 h [Day 2 (D2)] of incubation and interpreted following EUCAST and CLSI guidelines, which currently provide different interpretative breakpoints. Performance of commercial techniques was compared with BMD results.
MIC50/D1 and MIC50/D2 were both 8 mg/L, while MIC90/D1 and MIC90/D2 were 16 and 32 mg/L, respectively. MICD1 values for poxtA-positive isolates were lower than those for optrA-positive isolates. Proportions of susceptible isolates at D1 and D2 were 48% and 41%, respectively, according to EUCAST breakpoints and 35% and 13%, respectively, according to CLSI criteria (the proportions of isolates categorized as intermediate following CLSI recommendations were 13% and 28% at D1 and D2, respectively). Percentage susceptibility assessed by the commercially available techniques was always higher. The four commercial methods allowing MIC determination provided an overall essential agreement of ≥90% at D1. Categorical agreement and error rates were generally improved at D2.
Non-automated methods (Sensititre and UMIC) and, to a lesser extent, gradient strip Etest appear to show an acceptable correlation with the BMD reference method for the detection of isolates with low MICs of linezolid after prolonged incubation.
耐(linezolid-resistant)利奈唑胺(linzolid)肠球菌(LRE)引起的感染越来越难以治疗,这凸显了对 LRE 临床分离株进行可靠筛选的必要性。
评估肉汤微量稀释(BMD)法检测 LRE 的能力,并评估七种市售利奈唑胺药敏检测技术的性能。
研究了 100 株临床分离株(80 株屎肠球菌和 20 株粪肠球菌),包括 20 株 optrA 阳性分离株、17 株 poxtA 阳性分离株和 1 株 optrA/poxtA 阳性屎肠球菌分离株。MIC 在孵育 18 小时(第 1 天(D1))和 42 小时(第 2 天(D2))后测定,并按照 EUCAST 和 CLSI 指南进行解释,目前这些指南提供了不同的解释性折点。将商业技术的性能与 BMD 结果进行比较。
MIC50/D1 和 MIC50/D2 均为 8mg/L,而 MIC90/D1 和 MIC90/D2 分别为 16 和 32mg/L。poxtA 阳性分离株的 MICD1 值低于 optrA 阳性分离株。根据 EUCAST 折点,D1 和 D2 时敏感分离株的比例分别为 48%和 41%,根据 CLSI 标准分别为 35%和 13%(CLSI 推荐标准下,D1 和 D2 时归类为中介的分离株比例分别为 13%和 28%)。市售技术评估的药敏率总是更高。四种允许 MIC 测定的商业方法在 D1 时总体基本符合率≥90%。D2 时分类一致性和错误率通常有所提高。
非自动化方法(Sensititre 和 UMIC)以及梯度条 Etest 在一定程度上显示出与 BMD 参考方法在延长孵育时间后检测低浓度利奈唑胺分离株的相关性较好。