Rapid detection of fosfomycin resistance in Escherichia coli and Klebsiella spp. strains isolated from urinary tract infections.

This study evaluates whether the rapid fosfomycin resistance (fosfomycin NP) method can be used for detecting fosfomycin resistance in routine laboratory work. Results from the disk diffusion and rapid fosfomycin NP methods were compared with the reference agar dilution method for Escherichia coli and Klebsiella spp. strains isolated from urinary tract infections. The study included 57 E. coli and 48 Klebsiella spp. isolates from urinary tract infections. The reference agar dilution and disk diffusion methods were performed in accordance with EUCAST recommendations, and the results were evaluated according to EUCAST V.10.0. The method developed by Nordmann et al. was used for rapid detection of fosfomycin resistance (Nordmann, P., Poirel, L., Mueller, L., 2019. Rapid Detection of Fosfomycin Resistance in Escherichia coli. J Clin Microbiol. 57(1), e01531-18. doi:https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.01531-18). The acceptable categorical agreement (CA ≥ 90%) and the rates of major error (ME <3%) and very major error (VME < 3%) of the two methods were compared with the reference method according to the criteria of ISO 20776-1. Fosfomycin resistance was detected in 15.8% of E. coli and 75% of Klebsiella spp. isolates using the reference method. Disk diffusion method showed CA 89.5%, ME 12.5% in E. coli isolates, and CA 75%, ME 100% in Klebsiella spp. isolates. No VME was detected in both methods. The rapid fosfomycin NP method resulted in CA 96.4%, ME 0.0%, VME 22.2% in E. coli isolates, and CA 77.3%, ME 81.8%, and VME 3% in Klebsiella spp. isolates. We believe the results from both of disk diffusion assay and rapid fosfomycin NP for the E. coli and Klebsiella spp. isolates are incompatible with the reference method and should not be used as an alternative to the agar dilution method.

Evaluation of the performance of rapid antibiotic susceptibility test results using the disk diffusion directly from the positive blood culture bottles.

PURPOSE: In this study, we aimed to evaluate the compliance of rapid antibiotic susceptibility test (RAST) and conventional laboratory procedures. METHODS: The RAST was performed directly from the blood cultures of 71 Gram negative bacilli (GNB) and 38 Gram positive cocci (GPC) isolates. The results were evaluated at fourth, sixth and eighth hour. Categorical agreement (CA), very major error (VME), major error (ME) and minor error (mE) were calculated and compared with the results of conventional Vitek-2 system. RESULTS: Categorical agreement was detected ≥90 in cefotaxime and meropenem at fourth hour in Escherichia coli isolates. An encourage positive CA results were obtained from meropenem, ceftazidime and ciprofloxacin at the fourth hour in Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates. CA was compatible in imipenem, ciprofloxacin, gentamicin, and tobramycin for Pseudomonas aeruginosa at sixth hour. CA was low (<90%) in piperacillin-tazobactam for E. coli and K. pneumoniae, and meropenem in P. aeruginosa isolates. A good CA (≥90) with all tested antibiotics were found at all hours for Acinetobacter baumannii and also very high CA (100%) was detected at sixth and eighth hour in Staphylococcus aureus isolates. CA remained below the standard criteria at fourth hour in vancomycin and high level gentamicin, in addition to imipenem at sixth hours in enterococci isolates. VME and ME were not detected and mE was 12.7% in GNB and 50% in GPC at eighth hour. CONCLUSIONS: EUCAST RAST at eighth hour will be beneficial in urgent patients due to their high CA rate, easy preparation, inexpensive, and could be performed with the available equipment and personnel.