Suppr超能文献

针对耐碳青霉烯类肺炎克雷伯菌和大肠埃希菌,体外磷霉素药敏试验方法与琼脂稀释法的比较

Comparison of in vitro fosfomycin susceptibility testing methods with agar dilution for carbapenem resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae and Escherichiacoli.

作者信息

Pereira Joanna Valanie, Bari Anurag Kumar, Kokare Rashmi, Poojary Aruna

机构信息

Department of Pathology & Microbiology, Breach Candy Hospital Trust, Mumbai, India.

Department of Pathology & Microbiology, Breach Candy Hospital Trust, Mumbai, India.

出版信息

Indian J Med Microbiol. 2023 Mar-Apr;42:39-45. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmmb.2023.01.005. Epub 2023 Feb 2.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The emergence of Extensively drug resistant (XDR) pathogens like Carbapenem Resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae (CR Kpn) and Carbapenem Resistant Escherichia coli (CR Eco) has limited therapeutic options for treating them. Fosfomycin a broad-spectrum antibiotic, has emerged as a potential treatment option in combination with other agents. It is therefore important that accurate drug susceptibility testing (DST) results of fosfomycin should be available to all clinical microbiology laboratories. Agar dilution which is the recommended method for fosfomycin DST is not convenient to adopt in a routine set-up. This study aimed to determine the susceptibility pattern of CR Kpn and CR Eco to fosfomycin and to evaluate the discrepancies of the available manual MIC based alternative methods.

METHODS

Agar dilution (AD), broth microdilution (BMD), E-test and Ezy MIC test were performed on 235 CR-Kpn and Eco isolates respectively.

RESULTS

Of 177 CR Kpn, 31.63% (n ​= ​56/177) of the isolates were susceptible by AD. Categorical Agreement (CA) by BMD, E-test and Ezy MIC were lower than the acceptable limit while Very Major Errors (VMEs) and Major Errors (MEs) were beyond the acceptable limits. In the case of CR Eco, 96.55% (n ​= ​56/58) were susceptible by AD. CA of 100% (n ​= ​58/58) was shown by both BMD and Ezy MIC while 86.20% (n ​= ​50/58) was shown by E-test, with no VME observed for CR Eco. ME was only observed for E-test method.

CONCLUSION

The alternative methods were in poor agreement with AD method for CR Kpn and for CR Eco, BMD and Ezy MIC have shown reliable results.

摘要

目的

耐碳青霉烯类肺炎克雷伯菌(CR Kpn)和耐碳青霉烯类大肠埃希菌(CR Eco)等广泛耐药(XDR)病原体的出现,限制了治疗它们的选择。磷霉素作为一种广谱抗生素,已成为与其他药物联合使用的潜在治疗选择。因此,所有临床微生物实验室都应能获得准确的磷霉素药敏试验(DST)结果。琼脂稀释法是磷霉素DST的推荐方法,但在常规设置中采用起来并不方便。本研究旨在确定CR Kpn和CR Eco对磷霉素的药敏模式,并评估现有的基于手工MIC的替代方法的差异。

方法

分别对235株CR-Kpn和Eco分离株进行琼脂稀释法(AD)、肉汤微量稀释法(BMD)、E-test法和Ezy MIC试验。

结果

在177株CR Kpn中,31.63%(n = 56/177)的分离株通过AD法检测为敏感。BMD法、E-test法和Ezy MIC法的分类一致性(CA)低于可接受限度,而非常重大错误(VME)和重大错误(ME)超出了可接受限度。对于CR Eco,96.55%(n = 56/58)通过AD法检测为敏感。BMD法和Ezy MIC法的CA均为100%(n = 58/58),而E-test法为86.20%(n = 50/58),CR Eco未观察到VME。仅在E-test法中观察到ME。

结论

对于CR Kpn,替代方法与AD法的一致性较差;对于CR Eco,BMD法和Ezy MIC法显示出可靠的结果。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验