Etestw versus broth microdilution for ceftaroline MIC determination with Staphylococcus aureus: Results from PREMIUM, a European multicentre study

Anna Giammanco, Luísa Sancho, Jazmín Díaz-Regañón, Elmano Ramalheira, Dave Weston, Fabio Arena, Paloma Merino, Álvaro Pascual, Dolores Pinheiro, Jorge Calvo, Melo Cristino, Mario Sarti, Rafael Cantón, Michel Delmée, Gustavo Cilla, Antonio Oliver, Annette Jepson, Valeria Biscaro, Fe Tubau Quintano, Manuel Rodríguez IglesiasMaria Labonia, Helen Humphrey, Annamaria D'Argenio, Greet Leven, Graham Harvey, Alison Eyre, Robert Paton, Francesc Marco, Germán Bou, José Elías García Sánchez, Youri Glupczynski, Kate Gould, Emilia Cercenado, Giovanni Pietro Gesu, Richard Aschbacher, Reinoud Cartuyvels, Annarita Mazzariol, José Manuel Diogo, Hans De Beenhouwer, Sara Droz, Francesco Luzzaro, Patrizia Pecile, Rosa Bartolomé, Esther Manso, María Isabel Morosini, Cristina Giraldi, Shazad Mushtaq, Olivier Denis, Maria Rosaria Catania, Geert Claeys, Denis Pierard, Stefania Stefani, Concepción Gimeno, Laura Pagani, Gian Maria Rossolini, Ramón Cisterna, Roberto Serra, Pierrette Melin, Jan Verhaegen, Helena Ramos, Andrew Swann, David M. Livermore, Reno Frei, Robin Howe, Kate Gould, Dorothy James, María García-Castillo

Risultato della ricerca: Articlepeer review

9 Citazioni (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the concordance of ceftaroline MIC values by reference broth microdilution (BMD) and Etest (bioMérieux, France) for MSSA and MRSA isolates obtained from PREMIUM (D372SL00001), a European multicentre study. Methods: Ceftaroline MICs were determined by reference BMD and by Etest for 1242 MSSA and MRSA isolates collected between February and May 2012 from adult patients with community-acquired pneumonia or complicated skin and soft tissue infections; tests were performed across six European laboratories. Selected isolates with ceftaroline resistance in broth (MIC >1 mg/L) were retested in three central laboratories to confirm their behaviour. Results: Overall concordance between BMD and Etest was good, with >97% essential agreement and >95% categorical agreement. Nevertheless, 12 of the 26 MRSA isolates found resistant by BMD scored as susceptible by Etest, with MICs ≤1 mg/L, thus counting as very major errors, whereas only 5 of 380 MRSA isolates found ceftaroline susceptible in BMD were miscategorized as resistant by Etest. Twenty-one of the 26 isolates with MICs of 2 mg/L by BMD were then retested twice by each of three central laboratories: BMD MICs of 2 mg/L were consistently found for 19 of the 21 isolates. Among 147 Etest results for these 21 isolates (original plus six repeats per isolate) 112 were >1 mg/L. Conclusions: BMD and Etest have good overall agreement for ceftaroline against Staphylococcus aureus; nevertheless, reliable Etest-based discrimination of the minority of ceftaroline-resistant (MIC 2 mg/L) MRSA is extremely challenging, requiring careful reading of strips, ideally with duplicate testing.
Lingua originaleEnglish
pagine (da-a)431-436
Numero di pagine6
RivistaJournal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy
Volume72
Stato di pubblicazionePublished - 2017

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Pharmacology
  • Microbiology (medical)
  • Infectious Diseases
  • Pharmacology (medical)

Fingerprint Entra nei temi di ricerca di 'Etestw versus broth microdilution for ceftaroline MIC determination with Staphylococcus aureus: Results from PREMIUM, a European multicentre study'. Insieme formano una fingerprint unica.

Cita questo