Performance of commercial methods for linezolid susceptibility testing of Enterococcus faecium and Enterococcus faecalis

Author:

Dejoies Loren12,Boukthir Sarrah1,Péan de Ponfilly Gauthier3,Le Guen Ronan4,Zouari Asma15,Potrel Sophie15,Collet Anaïs15,Auger Gabriel15,Jacquier Hervé3,Fihman Vincent46,Dortet Laurent7,Cattoir Vincent125ORCID

Affiliation:

1. CHU de Rennes, Service de Bactériologie et Hygiène Hospitalière, Rennes, France

2. U1230 ‘ARN régulateurs Bactériens et Médecine’, Université Rennes 1, Rennes, France

3. Hôpital Lariboisière, Service de Bactériologie-Virologie, Paris, France

4. Hôpitaux Universitaires Henri Mondor, Unité de Bactériologie-Hygiène, Créteil, France

5. CNR de la Résistance aux Antibiotiques (laboratoire associé ‘Entérocoques’), Rennes, France

6. EA 7380 Dynamyc, EnvA, UPEC, Paris-Est University, Créteil, France

7. CHU de Bicêtre, service de Bactériologie-Hygiène, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, France

Abstract

Abstract Background Linezolid-resistant enterococci (LRE) causing infections that are challenging to treat are rising, highlighting the need for reliable screening of LRE clinical isolates. Objectives 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. Methods 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. 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. Conclusions 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.

Funder

Santé Publique France

French National Public Health Agency

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Infectious Diseases,Pharmacology (medical),Pharmacology,Microbiology (medical)

Cited by 8 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3