Erdoğan Gizem, Karakoç Ayşe Esra, Yücel Mihriban, Yağcı Serap
Ankara Training and Research Hospital, Clinic of Medical Microbiology, Ankara, Turkey.
Mikrobiyol Bul. 2021 Oct;55(4):626-634. doi: 10.5578/mb.20219713.
Early reporting of the antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST) results is essential for the survival of sepsis patients. In 2019, European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) published a proposal to detect antimicrobial susceptibility from positive blood culture bottles with a rapid antimicrobial susceptibility test (RAST) method in a maximum of eight hours. In this study, it was aimed to evaluate the EUCAST RAST method in blood culture bottles that resulted with positive signal in BacT/ALERT (bioMérieux, France) blood culture system and that showed gram-negative bacteria with single morphology with Gram stain. The study was conducted prospectively between April 2019 and November 2019. Ninety blood culture bottles that we detected single gram negative bacteria morphology by Gram stain were tested according to the EUCAST RAST method, The isolates obtained from the blood culture bottles were studied with the EUCAST disk diffusion method and the Vitek 2 Compact (bioMerieux, France) automated system. The results obtained with RAST were compared with the results of these methods. The turn around time of the RAST method was recorded. Categorical agreement of the RAST method with conventional methods and the very major error rates were determined. Of the 14 isolates not yet covered by the EUCAST HADT method, 12 were determined to be other Enterobacterales members and two as other non-fermentatives. Two isolates were detected with the same morphological characteristics in Gram stain of the blood culture bottle and the same antibiotic susceptibility profile, but with different identification results. These sixteen isolates were excluded from the study. In this study the susceptibility of 74 isolates were determined according to the EUCAST breakpoint tables, of which 31 were Klebsiella pneumoniae, 35 were Escherichia coli, four were Acinetobacter baumannii and four were Pseudomonas aeruginosa. According to the evaluation periods of EUCAST RAST; the susceptibility profile was reported for nine (12%) of E.coli at four hours, eight (11%) at six hours, 18 (24%) at eight hours; three (4%) of K.pneumoniae at four hours, 16 (21%) at six hours, 12 (16%) at eight hours; three of P.aeruginosa (4%) at six hours, one (1%) at eight hours; two of A.baumannii (2%) at six hours and two (2%) at eight hours. The categorical aggrement of the RAST method was 91.8% with the automated system and 96.8% with the disc diffusion method. Very major errors of RAST method compared to the automated system were detected for piperacillin-tazobactam (17.7%), ceftazidime (11.6%) and meropenem (5.6%); and when compared to the disc diffusion method, for cefotaxime (5.7%) and meropenem (6.7%). Our results have shown that EUCAST RAST method can practicaly be performed in routine laboratories to report early results with a low cost. Because of the very major errors it is necessary to confirm the results with the standard methods.
早期报告抗生素敏感性试验(AST)结果对于脓毒症患者的存活至关重要。2019年,欧洲抗菌药物敏感性试验委员会(EUCAST)发布了一项提案,建议采用快速抗菌药物敏感性试验(RAST)方法,在最长八小时内从阳性血培养瓶中检测抗菌药物敏感性。在本研究中,旨在评估EUCAST RAST方法在BacT/ALERT(法国生物梅里埃公司)血培养系统中产生阳性信号且革兰氏染色显示单一形态革兰氏阴性菌的血培养瓶中的应用情况。该研究于2019年4月至2019年11月前瞻性开展。对90个经革兰氏染色检测出单一革兰氏阴性菌形态的血培养瓶,按照EUCAST RAST方法进行检测,从血培养瓶中获得的分离株采用EUCAST纸片扩散法和Vitek 2 Compact(法国生物梅里埃公司)自动化系统进行研究。将RAST获得的结果与这些方法的结果进行比较。记录RAST方法的周转时间。确定RAST方法与传统方法的分类一致性以及非常重大错误率。在尚未被EUCAST HADT方法涵盖的14株分离株中,12株被确定为其他肠杆菌科成员,2株为其他非发酵菌。在血培养瓶的革兰氏染色中检测到2株具有相同形态特征和相同抗生素敏感性谱但鉴定结果不同的分离株。这16株分离株被排除在研究之外。在本研究中,根据EUCAST折点表确定了74株分离株的敏感性,其中31株为肺炎克雷伯菌,35株为大肠埃希菌,4株为鲍曼不动杆菌,4株为铜绿假单胞菌。根据EUCAST RAST的评估时间段;4小时时报告了9株(12%)大肠埃希菌的敏感性谱,6小时时报告了8株(11%),8小时时报告了18株(24%);4小时时报告了3株(4%)肺炎克雷伯菌的敏感性谱,6小时时报告了16株(21%),8小时时报告了12株(16%);6小时时报告了3株(4%)铜绿假单胞菌的敏感性谱,8小时时报告了1株(1%);6小时时报告了2株(2%)鲍曼不动杆菌的敏感性谱,8小时时报告了2株(2%)。RAST方法与自动化系统的分类一致性为91.8%,与纸片扩散法的分类一致性为96.8%。与自动化系统相比,RAST方法在哌拉西林 - 他唑巴坦(17.7%)、头孢他啶(11.6%)和美罗培南(5.6%)方面检测到非常重大错误;与纸片扩散法相比,在头孢噻肟(5.7%)和美罗培南(6.7%)方面检测到非常重大错误。我们的结果表明,EUCAST RAST方法实际上可以在常规实验室中进行,以低成本报告早期结果。由于存在非常重大错误,有必要用标准方法确认结果。