Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials (Aug 2007)

Comparison of disc diffusion, Etest and broth microdilution for testing susceptibility of carbapenem-resistant <it>P. aeruginosa </it>to polymyxins

  • Fung Liang,
  • De Pedri Ewerton H,
  • Levin Anna S,
  • van der Heijden Inneke M,
  • Rossi Flavia,
  • Duboc Gisele,
  • Barone Antonio A,
  • Costa Silvia F

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-0711-6-8
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 6, no. 1
p. 8

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Considering the increasing use of polymyxins to treat infections due to multidrug resistant Gram-negative in many countries, it is important to evaluate different susceptibility testing methods to this class of antibiotic. Methods Susceptibility of 109 carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosa to polymyxins was tested comparing broth microdilution (reference method), disc diffusion, and Etest using the new interpretative breakpoints of Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Results Twenty-nine percent of isolates belonged to endemic clone and thus, these strains were excluded of analysis. Among 78 strains evaluated, only one isolate was resistant to polymyxin B by the reference method (MIC: 8.0 μg/mL). Very major and major error rates of 1.2% and 11.5% were detected comparing polymyxin B disc diffusion with the broth microdilution (reference method). Agreement within 1 twofold dilution between Etest and the broth microdilution were 33% for polymyxin B and 79.5% for colistin. One major error and 48.7% minor errors were found comparing polymyxin B Etest with broth microdilution and only 6.4% minor errors with colistin. The concordance between Etest and the broth microdilution (reference method) was respectively 100% for colistin and 90% for polymyxin B. Conclusion Resistance to polymyxins seems to be rare among hospital carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosa isolates over a six-year period. Our results showed, using the new CLSI criteria, that the disc diffusion susceptibility does not report major errors (false-resistant results) for colistin. On the other hand, showed a high frequency of minor errors and 1 very major error for polymyxin B. Etest presented better results for colistin than polymyxin B. Until these results are reproduced with a large number of polymyxins-resistant P. aeruginosa isolates, susceptibility to polymyxins should be confirmed by a reference method.