Journal of Global Antimicrobial Resistance (Sep 2021)

Comparison of Etest and broth microdilution for evaluating the susceptibility of Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pneumoniae to ceftaroline and of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales and Pseudomonas aeruginosa to ceftazidime/avibactam

  • Yu-Tsung Huang,
  • Yao-Wen Kuo,
  • Lee-Jene Teng,
  • Chun-Hsing Liao,
  • Po-Ren Hsueh

Journal volume & issue
Vol. 26
pp. 301 – 307

Abstract

Read online

ABSTRACT: Objectives: Decreased susceptibility to ceftazidime/avibactam (CZA) and ceftaroline (CPT) has been reported during antimicrobial resistance surveillance and therapy. Conventional laboratories are unable to provide timely susceptibility testing for CZA and CPT because these antimicrobial agents are not incorporated in automated susceptibility testing systems. Methods: We evaluated Etest and the Sensititre broth microdilution (BMD) method for testing CZA against carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacilli and CPT against important Gram-positive cocci bloodstream isolates. Genotypes of carbapenemases in Enterobacterales were also determined using the Xpert® Carba-R assay. Results: Etest showed ≥90% agreement with Sensititre BMD for carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae (CRKP) (n = 187), carbapenem-resistant Escherichia coli (CREC) (n = 28) and Streptococcus pneumoniae (n = 35); however, the very major error rate exceeded 3%. Agreement between Etest and Sensititre BMD was <90% for carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (CRPA) (n = 81), methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) (n = 92) and methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) (n = 170). Both agents remained potent with a high susceptibility rate by Sensititre BMD as follows: CZA against CRKP (95.0%), CREC (89.3%) and CRPA (84.5%); and CPT against MSSA (100.0%), MRSA (95.3%) and S. pneumoniae (94.3%). CZA was active against blaKPC-carrying CRKP (98.5% susceptible), and resistance in the majority of CZA-resistant Enterobacterales isolates (6 of 10 CRKP and 2 of 3 CREC) was due to the presence of a metallo-β-lactamase gene. Conclusion: Our results suggest that interpretation of susceptibility results obtained by Etest for both agents should be undertaken cautiously and remains challenging.

Keywords