广泛耐药肺炎克雷伯菌、鲍曼不动杆菌和铜绿假单胞菌6种不同方法检测粘菌素耐药性与参考方法肉汤微量稀释法的比较

IF 3.7 3区 医学 Q2 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Özlem Aydemir, Sema Çetin, Nilay Can, Gökçen Ormanoğlu, Mehmet Köroğlu
{"title":"广泛耐药肺炎克雷伯菌、鲍曼不动杆菌和铜绿假单胞菌6种不同方法检测粘菌素耐药性与参考方法肉汤微量稀释法的比较","authors":"Özlem Aydemir, Sema Çetin, Nilay Can, Gökçen Ormanoğlu, Mehmet Köroğlu","doi":"10.1007/s10096-024-05019-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the agreement of different methods with the reference method in the detection of colistin resistance in extensively drug-resistant K. pneumoniae, A. baumannii and P. aeruginosa isolates.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>K. pneumoniae, A. baumannii and P. aeruginosa isolates were included in the study. All isolates were subjected to colistin susceptibility testing with seven different methods. All results were compared with broth microdilution results. Categorical agreement (CA), very majorl error (VME) and major error (ME) rates were calculated for the tested methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In all methods, VME and ME rates were found to be above the acceptable performance limit for all strains. Although VME rates were above the target value in all strains, the lowest VME rates were detected in MRRP-NP with 12.5%. Among all isolates, the lowest ME rate was obtained in MCLDE with 10% and the highest ME rate was detected in VITEK 2<sup>®</sup> with 19.9%. The highest ME rate was detected in VITEK 2<sup>®</sup> with 27.3%. The highest CA in A. baumannii was detected in MRRP-NP; in P. aeruginosa, it was detected in MCLDE, MCLDER and MRRP-NP. CA in K. pneumoniae isolates was below the acceptable performance in all methods.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results obtained in this study show that the methods used in colistin susceptibility testing still need standardization. There is an urgent need for a colistin susceptibility testing method that is easy to apply, inexpensive and suitable for routine use.</p>","PeriodicalId":11782,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases","volume":" ","pages":"629-638"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of six different methods used in detection of colistin resistance in extensively drug-resistant K. pneumoniae, A. baumannii and P. aeruginosa isolates with the reference method broth microdilution method.\",\"authors\":\"Özlem Aydemir, Sema Çetin, Nilay Can, Gökçen Ormanoğlu, Mehmet Köroğlu\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10096-024-05019-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the agreement of different methods with the reference method in the detection of colistin resistance in extensively drug-resistant K. pneumoniae, A. baumannii and P. aeruginosa isolates.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>K. pneumoniae, A. baumannii and P. aeruginosa isolates were included in the study. All isolates were subjected to colistin susceptibility testing with seven different methods. All results were compared with broth microdilution results. Categorical agreement (CA), very majorl error (VME) and major error (ME) rates were calculated for the tested methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In all methods, VME and ME rates were found to be above the acceptable performance limit for all strains. Although VME rates were above the target value in all strains, the lowest VME rates were detected in MRRP-NP with 12.5%. Among all isolates, the lowest ME rate was obtained in MCLDE with 10% and the highest ME rate was detected in VITEK 2<sup>®</sup> with 19.9%. The highest ME rate was detected in VITEK 2<sup>®</sup> with 27.3%. The highest CA in A. baumannii was detected in MRRP-NP; in P. aeruginosa, it was detected in MCLDE, MCLDER and MRRP-NP. CA in K. pneumoniae isolates was below the acceptable performance in all methods.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results obtained in this study show that the methods used in colistin susceptibility testing still need standardization. There is an urgent need for a colistin susceptibility testing method that is easy to apply, inexpensive and suitable for routine use.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11782,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"629-638\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10096-024-05019-y\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/12/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10096-024-05019-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:评价不同方法与参考方法在广泛耐药肺炎克雷伯菌、鲍曼假单胞菌和铜绿假单胞菌中粘菌素耐药性检测中的一致性。材料与方法:采用分离的肺炎克雷伯菌、鲍曼不动杆菌和铜绿假单胞菌进行研究。所有分离株采用7种不同的方法进行粘菌素药敏试验。所有结果与微量肉汤稀释结果进行比较。计算了测试方法的绝对一致性(CA)、非常严重错误率(VME)和严重错误率(ME)。结果:在所有方法中,所有菌株的VME和ME率均高于可接受的性能极限。虽然所有菌株的VME率均高于目标值,但MRRP-NP的VME率最低,为12.5%。在所有分离株中,MCLDE的ME率最低,为10%,VITEK 2®的ME率最高,为19.9%。在VITEK 2®中检测到最高的ME率为27.3%。在MRRP-NP中检测到鲍曼不动杆菌的CA最高;在铜绿假单胞菌中,在MCLDE、MCLDER和MRRP-NP中均检测到。肺炎克雷伯菌分离株的CA在所有方法中均低于可接受水平。结论:本研究结果表明,粘菌素药敏试验方法尚需规范。迫切需要一种易于应用、价格低廉且适合常规使用的粘菌素药敏试验方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of six different methods used in detection of colistin resistance in extensively drug-resistant K. pneumoniae, A. baumannii and P. aeruginosa isolates with the reference method broth microdilution method.

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the agreement of different methods with the reference method in the detection of colistin resistance in extensively drug-resistant K. pneumoniae, A. baumannii and P. aeruginosa isolates.

Materials and methods: K. pneumoniae, A. baumannii and P. aeruginosa isolates were included in the study. All isolates were subjected to colistin susceptibility testing with seven different methods. All results were compared with broth microdilution results. Categorical agreement (CA), very majorl error (VME) and major error (ME) rates were calculated for the tested methods.

Results: In all methods, VME and ME rates were found to be above the acceptable performance limit for all strains. Although VME rates were above the target value in all strains, the lowest VME rates were detected in MRRP-NP with 12.5%. Among all isolates, the lowest ME rate was obtained in MCLDE with 10% and the highest ME rate was detected in VITEK 2® with 19.9%. The highest ME rate was detected in VITEK 2® with 27.3%. The highest CA in A. baumannii was detected in MRRP-NP; in P. aeruginosa, it was detected in MCLDE, MCLDER and MRRP-NP. CA in K. pneumoniae isolates was below the acceptable performance in all methods.

Conclusions: The results obtained in this study show that the methods used in colistin susceptibility testing still need standardization. There is an urgent need for a colistin susceptibility testing method that is easy to apply, inexpensive and suitable for routine use.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.40
自引率
2.20%
发文量
138
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: EJCMID is an interdisciplinary journal devoted to the publication of communications on infectious diseases of bacterial, viral and parasitic origin.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信