Antimicrobianos, Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Infecciosas, Antimicrobial Service of the National Institute of Infectious Diseases (ANLIS Dr. Carlos G. Malbrán), Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Center for Applied Biotechnology Studies, Department of Biological Science, College of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, California State University Fullerton, Fullerton, CA, USA.
J Microbiol Methods. 2024 Aug;223:106972. doi: 10.1016/j.mimet.2024.106972. Epub 2024 Jun 12.
Recently, considerable uncertainty has arisen concerning the appropriate susceptibility testing for cefiderocol in gram-negative bacilli, particularly in the context of its application to Acinetobacter spp. The optimal method for assessing the susceptibility levels of Acinetobacter spp. to cefiderocol remains a subject of debate due to substantial disparities observed in the values obtained through various testing procedures. This study employed four minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) methodologies and the disk diffusion to assess the susceptibility of twenty-seven carbapenem resistant (CR)-Acinetobacter strains to cefiderocol. The results from our study reveal significant variations in the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) values obtained with the different methods and in the level of agreement in interpretation categories between the different MIC methods and the disk diffusion test. Among the MIC methods, there was relatively more consistency in reporting the interpretation categories. For European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) breakpoints, the categorical agreement (CA) for MIC methods ranged between 66.7 and 81.5%. On the other hand, the essential agreement (EA) values were as low as 18.5-29.6%. The CA between MIC methods and disk diffusion was 81.5%. These results emphasize the need for a reliable, accurate, and clinically validated methodology to effectively assess the susceptibility of Acinetobacter spp. to cefiderocol. The wide variability observed in our study highlights the importance of standardizing the susceptibility testing process for cefiderocol to ensure consistent and reliable results for clinical decision-making.
最近,关于革兰氏阴性菌中头孢他啶的药敏试验(特别是在适用于不动杆菌属的情况下)存在相当大的不确定性。由于通过各种检测程序获得的值存在显著差异,因此评估不动杆菌属对头孢他啶敏感性的最佳方法仍然存在争议。本研究采用四种最低抑菌浓度(MIC)方法和纸片扩散法评估了 27 株耐碳青霉烯类(CR)不动杆菌对头孢他啶的敏感性。我们的研究结果表明,不同方法获得的最小抑菌浓度(MIC)值存在显著差异,并且不同 MIC 方法与纸片扩散试验之间的解释类别一致性存在差异。在 MIC 方法中,报告解释类别相对更一致。对于欧洲抗菌药物敏感性试验委员会(EUCAST)折点,MIC 方法的分类一致性(CA)在 66.7%至 81.5%之间。另一方面,基本一致率(EA)值低至 18.5%-29.6%。MIC 方法和纸片扩散之间的 CA 为 81.5%。这些结果强调需要一种可靠、准确和经过临床验证的方法来有效评估头孢他啶对不动杆菌属的敏感性。我们的研究中观察到的广泛变异性强调了标准化头孢他啶药敏试验过程的重要性,以确保为临床决策提供一致和可靠的结果。