Susceptibility of enterococci to daptomycin is dependent upon testing methodology |
| |
Authors: | Kendall A. Bryant Amity L. Roberts Mark E. Rupp James R. Anderson Elizabeth R. Lyden Paul D. Fey Trevor C. Van Schooneveld |
| |
Affiliation: | 1. Division of Infectious Disease, Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, 984031 Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198-4031, USA;2. Department of Pathology and Microbiology, College of Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, 984031 Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198-4031, USA;3. College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, 984031 Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198-4031, USA |
| |
Abstract: | An increase in daptomycin nonsusceptible enterococci (DNSE) was noted in our institution (8.3% 2008 to 34.5% 2011) using MicroScan methods which may overestimate DNSE prevalence. DNSE (N = 150) from the clinical laboratory (2008–2011) underwent susceptibility testing using broth microdilution (BMD), Etest, Sensititire, MicroScan prompt (MSP), and MicroScan turbidity (MST) with only 20% of isolates confirmed as nonsusceptible. Categorical and essential agreement were highest with MSP and MST, but both missed the majority of resistant isolates (70% and 87% missed). Etest MIC values were statistically higher, more likely to be nonsusceptible, had the lowest very major error rate (37%), and the highest falsely nonsusceptible rate (22%). Sensititre MIC values were not statistically different from BMD, but missed 57% of DNSE. PFGE analysis did not define a clonal outbreak. These findings suggest that MicroScan methods overestimate nonsusceptibility, and the lack of correlation between methods raises questions regarding which method is most effective at confirming nonsusceptibility. |
| |
Keywords: | Daptomycin Susceptibility testing Enterococcus |
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录! |
|