Peng-Peng Tian, Hui Yang, Tian Wang, Li Wang, Meng-Yao Du, Shan-Shan Su, Li-Sha Zhu, Xian-Mo Wang, Liang-Cai Xie, Wen Fan, Tian Tian, Hua-Wei Yi
{"title":"EUCAST对革兰氏阴性菌直接血培养快速药敏试验的评价。","authors":"Peng-Peng Tian, Hui Yang, Tian Wang, Li Wang, Meng-Yao Du, Shan-Shan Su, Li-Sha Zhu, Xian-Mo Wang, Liang-Cai Xie, Wen Fan, Tian Tian, Hua-Wei Yi","doi":"10.2147/IDR.S514981","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aims to evaluate the accuracy of EUCAST rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing (RAST) for Gram-negative bacteria directly from positive blood cultures, comparing it with short-term incubation (5-7 hours) and conventional broth microdilution methods.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 139 Gram-negative isolates were tested. RAST results were assessed at 4 h, 6 h against minimal inhibitory concentration results using the short-term incubation (5-7 h) method, while at 16-20 h, the RAST results were compared to conventional method. For those with interpretable results, CLSI M52 was used to define cutoffs for equivalence in antimicrobial susceptibility testing.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among all isolates, 80.6% (112/139) were successfully interpreted based on EUCAST RAST breakpoints, including <i>Escherichia coli</i> (81), <i>Klebsiella pneumoniae</i> complex (17), <i>Pseudomonas aeruginosa</i> (10) and <i>Acinetobacter baumannii</i> (4). The overall category agreements for all tested antibiotics were 98.9%, 99.5%, and 99.7% at 4, 6, and 16-20 hours, respectively, for <i>E. coli</i>, and 100% for <i>K. pneumoniae, P. aeruginosa</i>, and <i>A. baumannii</i>. The area of technical uncertainty rate significantly decreased over time, from 9.1% at 4 hours to 3.1% at 16-20 hours (<i>p</i> < 0.05). The method effectively identified extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing and carbapenem-resistant bacteria, demonstrating performance comparable to the BD system. Additionally, results for other <i>Enterobacterales</i> could be interpreted using the RAST breakpoints for <i>E. coli</i>. The integration of RAST into routine workflows provides rapid and accurate results without incurring additional costs or labor.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>RAST is a reliable and cost-effective method for testing Gram-negative bacteria directly from blood cultures, significantly reducing turnaround time. Utilizing RAST at various reading times (6 hours and 16-20 hours) optimizes clinical workflows, enhances antimicrobial stewardship, and improves patient outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":13577,"journal":{"name":"Infection and Drug Resistance","volume":"18 ","pages":"3579-3590"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12297011/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of EUCAST Rapid Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing for Gram-Negative Bacteria Directly from Positive Blood Cultures.\",\"authors\":\"Peng-Peng Tian, Hui Yang, Tian Wang, Li Wang, Meng-Yao Du, Shan-Shan Su, Li-Sha Zhu, Xian-Mo Wang, Liang-Cai Xie, Wen Fan, Tian Tian, Hua-Wei Yi\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/IDR.S514981\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aims to evaluate the accuracy of EUCAST rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing (RAST) for Gram-negative bacteria directly from positive blood cultures, comparing it with short-term incubation (5-7 hours) and conventional broth microdilution methods.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 139 Gram-negative isolates were tested. RAST results were assessed at 4 h, 6 h against minimal inhibitory concentration results using the short-term incubation (5-7 h) method, while at 16-20 h, the RAST results were compared to conventional method. For those with interpretable results, CLSI M52 was used to define cutoffs for equivalence in antimicrobial susceptibility testing.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among all isolates, 80.6% (112/139) were successfully interpreted based on EUCAST RAST breakpoints, including <i>Escherichia coli</i> (81), <i>Klebsiella pneumoniae</i> complex (17), <i>Pseudomonas aeruginosa</i> (10) and <i>Acinetobacter baumannii</i> (4). The overall category agreements for all tested antibiotics were 98.9%, 99.5%, and 99.7% at 4, 6, and 16-20 hours, respectively, for <i>E. coli</i>, and 100% for <i>K. pneumoniae, P. aeruginosa</i>, and <i>A. baumannii</i>. The area of technical uncertainty rate significantly decreased over time, from 9.1% at 4 hours to 3.1% at 16-20 hours (<i>p</i> < 0.05). The method effectively identified extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing and carbapenem-resistant bacteria, demonstrating performance comparable to the BD system. Additionally, results for other <i>Enterobacterales</i> could be interpreted using the RAST breakpoints for <i>E. coli</i>. The integration of RAST into routine workflows provides rapid and accurate results without incurring additional costs or labor.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>RAST is a reliable and cost-effective method for testing Gram-negative bacteria directly from blood cultures, significantly reducing turnaround time. Utilizing RAST at various reading times (6 hours and 16-20 hours) optimizes clinical workflows, enhances antimicrobial stewardship, and improves patient outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13577,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Infection and Drug Resistance\",\"volume\":\"18 \",\"pages\":\"3579-3590\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12297011/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Infection and Drug Resistance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S514981\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Infection and Drug Resistance","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S514981","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Evaluation of EUCAST Rapid Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing for Gram-Negative Bacteria Directly from Positive Blood Cultures.
Purpose: This study aims to evaluate the accuracy of EUCAST rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing (RAST) for Gram-negative bacteria directly from positive blood cultures, comparing it with short-term incubation (5-7 hours) and conventional broth microdilution methods.
Methods: A total of 139 Gram-negative isolates were tested. RAST results were assessed at 4 h, 6 h against minimal inhibitory concentration results using the short-term incubation (5-7 h) method, while at 16-20 h, the RAST results were compared to conventional method. For those with interpretable results, CLSI M52 was used to define cutoffs for equivalence in antimicrobial susceptibility testing.
Results: Among all isolates, 80.6% (112/139) were successfully interpreted based on EUCAST RAST breakpoints, including Escherichia coli (81), Klebsiella pneumoniae complex (17), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (10) and Acinetobacter baumannii (4). The overall category agreements for all tested antibiotics were 98.9%, 99.5%, and 99.7% at 4, 6, and 16-20 hours, respectively, for E. coli, and 100% for K. pneumoniae, P. aeruginosa, and A. baumannii. The area of technical uncertainty rate significantly decreased over time, from 9.1% at 4 hours to 3.1% at 16-20 hours (p < 0.05). The method effectively identified extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing and carbapenem-resistant bacteria, demonstrating performance comparable to the BD system. Additionally, results for other Enterobacterales could be interpreted using the RAST breakpoints for E. coli. The integration of RAST into routine workflows provides rapid and accurate results without incurring additional costs or labor.
Conclusion: RAST is a reliable and cost-effective method for testing Gram-negative bacteria directly from blood cultures, significantly reducing turnaround time. Utilizing RAST at various reading times (6 hours and 16-20 hours) optimizes clinical workflows, enhances antimicrobial stewardship, and improves patient outcomes.
期刊介绍:
About Journal
Editors
Peer Reviewers
Articles
Article Publishing Charges
Aims and Scope
Call For Papers
ISSN: 1178-6973
Editor-in-Chief: Professor Suresh Antony
An international, peer-reviewed, open access journal that focuses on the optimal treatment of infection (bacterial, fungal and viral) and the development and institution of preventative strategies to minimize the development and spread of resistance.