Institute of Antibiotics, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Key Laboratory of Clinical Pharmacology of Antibiotics, Ministry of Health, Shanghai, China.
Microbiol Spectr. 2022 Feb 23;10(1):e0109221. doi: 10.1128/spectrum.01092-21. Epub 2022 Jan 12.
The objective of this research was to evaluate the correlation between inhibitory zones and MIC when testing ceftazidime-avibactam using disk diffusion, Etest, and broth microdilution method established by the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). Four-hundred and 58 isolates of isolated from 54 medical centers from the China Antimicrobial Surveillance Network (CHINET) in 2016 to 2020 were collected. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing using broth microdilution, Etest, and disk diffusion were performed according to the CLSI. Of the 458 , 17.2% (79/458) and 82.8%(379/458) were resistant or susceptible to ceftazidime-avibactam by broth microdilution, respectively. Compared with the broth microdilution method, the categorical agreement (CA) and essential agreement (EA) of the Etest were 99.6% (456/458) and 94.8% (434/458), respectively; the major error (ME) and very major error (VME) were both 0.2% (1/458). For disk diffusion, the CA and VME were 99.8% (457/458) and 0.2% (1/458), respectively. For Escherichia coli, the CA and EA of the Etest were 100% and 97.1% (135/139), respectively. The CA of the disk diffusion was 100%. For Klebsiella pneumoniae, the CA and EA of the Etest were 99.3% (288/290) and 93.4% (271/290), respectively, the ME and VME were both 0.3% (1/290). The CA and VME of disk diffusion were 99.7% (289/290) and 0.3% (1/290), respectively. For other , the CA and EA of the Etest were 100% and 96.6% (28/29), respectively. The CA of the disk diffusion was 100%. Ceftazidime-avibactam disk diffusion (30/20-μg disks) and Etest demonstrated good performance for ceftazidime-avibactam susceptibility testing against clinical isolates. Multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria, especially for extended-spectrum β-lactamases-producing and carbapenemase-producing , are disseminating rapidly around the world. Treatment options for these infections are limited, which prompt the development of novel or combinational therapies to combat the infections caused by multidrug-resistant pathogens. The newly available β-lactam combination agent ceftazidime-avibactam has been demonstrated good and activity against ESBL, AmpC, KPC-2, or OXA-48-like-producing isolates and has shown promise in treating carbapenem-resistant infections. Concerningly, there are few available automated systems for ceftazidime-avibactam susceptibility testing, and the broth microdilution method is hard to perform in most routine laboratories. Therefore, we urgently need an economical and practical method for the accurate detection of ceftazidime-avibactam activity against Gram-negative bacilli. Here, we evaluate the performance of the disk diffusion and Etest compared with the reference broth microdilution method against clinical strains.
本研究旨在评估头孢他啶-阿维巴坦使用纸片扩散法、Etest 和临床与实验室标准协会(CLSI)建立的肉汤微量稀释法进行测试时,抑菌环直径与 MIC 的相关性。从 2016 年至 2020 年,从中国抗菌药物监测网(CHINET)的 54 家医疗中心收集了 458 株分离自 的临床分离株。根据 CLSI 进行肉汤微量稀释法、Etest 和纸片扩散法的药敏试验。458 株 中,分别有 17.2%(79/458)和 82.8%(379/458)通过肉汤微量稀释法对头孢他啶-阿维巴坦耐药或敏感。与肉汤微量稀释法相比,Etest 的分类一致性(CA)和基本一致率(EA)分别为 99.6%(456/458)和 94.8%(434/458);主要误差(ME)和非常大误差(VME)均为 0.2%(1/458)。对于纸片扩散法,CA 和 VME 分别为 99.8%(457/458)和 0.2%(1/458)。对于大肠埃希菌,Etest 的 CA 和 EA 分别为 100%和 97.1%(135/139)。纸片扩散的 CA 为 100%。对于肺炎克雷伯菌,Etest 的 CA 和 EA 分别为 99.3%(288/290)和 93.4%(271/290),ME 和 VME 均为 0.3%(1/290)。纸片扩散的 CA 和 VME 分别为 99.7%(289/290)和 0.3%(1/290)。对于其他 ,Etest 的 CA 和 EA 均为 100%和 96.6%(28/29)。纸片扩散的 CA 为 100%。头孢他啶-阿维巴坦纸片扩散(30/20-μg 纸片)和 Etest 对临床分离株的头孢他啶-阿维巴坦药敏试验表现出良好的性能。多药耐药革兰氏阴性菌,尤其是产超广谱β-内酰胺酶和碳青霉烯酶的 ,在世界各地迅速传播。这些感染的治疗选择有限,这促使人们开发新的或联合疗法来对抗多药耐药病原体引起的感染。新的β-内酰胺联合制剂头孢他啶-阿维巴坦对 ESBL、AmpC、KPC-2 或 OXA-48 样产生的分离株具有良好的 和 活性,并在治疗碳青霉烯耐药 感染方面显示出前景。令人担忧的是,目前可用于头孢他啶-阿维巴坦药敏检测的自动化系统很少,而且大多数常规实验室都难以进行肉汤微量稀释法。因此,我们迫切需要一种经济实用的方法来准确检测头孢他啶-阿维巴坦对革兰氏阴性菌的活性。在这里,我们评估了纸片扩散法和 Etest 与参考肉汤微量稀释法相比,对临床菌株的性能。