Birol ŞAFAK, Özge TOMBAK, Aynur Eren TOPKAYA

KOLİSTİN ANTİMİKROBİYAL DUYARLILIK TESTİNİN VITEK 2 VE SIVI MİKRODİLÜSYON YÖNTEMLERİYLE KARŞILAŞTIRMALI OLARAK DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Amaç: Kolistin için hassas duyarlılık test yöntemlerine ihtiyaç vardır. Çalışmamızda VITEK 2 (bioMérieux, Marcy-L’Etoile, Fransa) otomatize sistem ile sıvı mikrodilüsyon yöntemini karşılaştırarak, VITEK 2 yönteminin kolistin duyarlılığını saptamadaki etkinliğini belirlemeyi amaçladık. Materyal ve Metot: Çeşitli Gram negatif bakterilerin kolistin duyarlılığı için laboratuvarımızda kullandığımız VITEK 2 otomatize sistem ve sıvı mikrodilüsyon yöntemini geriye dönük olarak karşılaştırıldı. Suşların tanımlanması konvansiyonel mikrobiyolojik yöntemler ve VITEK 2 otomatize bakteri tanımlama sistemi kullanılarak yapıldı. Bulgular: Çoğunluğu yoğun bakım ünitelerinden (n=56) izole edilen suşlar olmak üzere 104 Gram negatif mikroorganizmanın kolistin duyarlılık sonuçları karşılaştırıldı. Sıvı mikrodilüsyon yöntemi referans alındığında VITEK 2 ile 7 çok büyük hata (% 6.7), 4 büyük hata (% 3.8) tespit edildi. VITEK 2 için duyarlılık %92.9, özgüllük %20, pozitif prediktif değer %95.8, negatif prediktif değer % 12.5 olarak bulundu. Sonuç: Çalışmamızda VITEK 2, % 6.7’lik çok büyük hata oranı ve

Comparative Evaluation of VITEK 2 and Broth Microdilution Methods for Colistin Antimicrobial Susceptibility Test

Aim: Accurate susceptibility testing methods are needed for colistin. In our study, we aimed to determine the efficacy of VITEK 2 (bioMérieux, Marcy-L’Etoile, France) in detecting colistin sensitivity by comparing the broth microdilution method with VITEK 2 automated system. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively compared VITEK 2 automated system and broth microdilution method for colistin sensitivity of various Gram-negative bacteria. The isolates were identified by conventional microbiological methods and VITEK 2 automated bacterial identification system. Results: The colistin susceptibility results of 104 Gram-negative microorganisms were compared, mostly from intensive care units (n = 56). When the broth microdilution method was taken as a reference, 7 very major errors (6.7%) and 4 major errors (3.8%) were determined in VITEK 2. The sensitivity was 92.9%, specificity was 20%, positive predictive value was 95.8%, negative predictive value was 12.5%. Conclusion: In our study, VITEK 2 could not meet the required criteria for the acceptance of the method due to the very major errors of 6.7% and the agreement of < 90%. Although there are different results in many studies about the use of VITEK 2 in detecting the sensitivity of colistin, in our study did not meet the criteria for acceptance of the method.

PDF

___

1. Couet W, Grégoire N, Marchand S, Mimoz O. Colistin pharmacokinetics: the fog is lifting. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2012;18(1):30-9.
2. Loho T, Dharmayanti A. Colistin: an antibiotic and its role in multiresistant Gram-negative infections. Acta Med Indones. 2015;47(2):157-68.
3. Dhariwal AK, Tullu MS. Colistin: re-emergence of the 'forgotten' antimicrobial agent. J Postgrad Med. 2013;59(3):208-15.
4. Sader HS, Rhomberg PR, Farrell DJ, Jones RN. Differences in potency and categorical agreement between colistin and polymyxin Bwhen testing 15,377 clinical strains collected worldwide. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2015;83(4):379-81.
5. Poirel L, Jayol A, Nordmann P. Polymyxins: Antibacterial Activity, Susceptibility Testing, and Resistance Mechanisms Encoded by Plasmids or Chromosomes. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2017;30(2):557-596.
6. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing of colistin - problems detected with several commercially available products, updated April 2019.http://www.eucast.org/ast_of_bacteria/warnings/
7. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing of colistin - problems detected with several commercially available products, issued July 2016 and it is still valid April 2019. http://www.eucast.org/fileadmin/src/media/PDFs/EUCAST _files/Warnings/Warnings_docs/Warning_- _colistin_AST.pdf
8. Ezadi F, Ardebili A, Mirnejad R. Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing for Polymyxins: Challenges, Issues, and Recommendations. J Clin Microbiol. 2019;28;57(4).
9. Sherman EX, Wozniak JE, Weiss DS. Methods to Evaluate Colistin Heteroresistance in Acinetobacter baumannii. Methods Mol Biol. 2019;1946:39-50.
10. Rodriguez CH, Traglia G, Bastias N, Pandolfo C, Bruni G, Nastro M, Barrios R, Bavastro EM, Rey MC, Marques IA, Heger F, Vay C, Fernandez JS, Ramirez MS, Famiglietti A. Discrepancies in susceptibility testing to colistin in Acinetobacter baumannii: The influence of slow growth and heteroresistance. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2019 Nov;54(5):587-91.
11. Gwozdzinski K, Azarderakhsh S, Imirzalioglu C, Falgenhauer L, Chakraborty T. An Improved Medium for Colistin Susceptibility Testing. J Clin Microbiol. 2018;25;56(5).
12. Sharafi T, Ardebili A. Plastic binding feature of polymyxins: the effect on MIC susceptibility measurements. Infect Drug Resist. 2019;27;12:2649-53.
13. Humphries RM, Green DA, Schuetz AN, Bergman Y, Lewis S, Yee R, Stump S, Lopez M, Macesic N, Uhlemann AC, Kohner P, ColeN, Simner PJ. Multicenter Evaluation of Colistin Sıvı Disk Elution and Colistin Agar Test: a Report from the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. J Clin Microbiol. 2019;23;57(11)
14. Koyuncu Özyurt Ö, Özhak B, Öğünç D, Yıldız E, Çolak D, Günseren F, Öngüt G. Evaluation of the BD Phoenix100 System and Colistin Sıvı Disk Elution Method for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing of Colistin Against Gram-negative Bacteria. Mikrobiyol Bul. 2019;53(3):254- 61.
15. Germ J, Poirel L, Kisek TC, Spik VC, Seme K, Premru MM, Zupanc TL(, Nordmann P, Pirs M. Evaluation of resazurin-based rapid test to detect colistin resistance in Acinetobacter baumannii isolates. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2019;38(11):2159-62.
16. Mathilde Lescat, Laurent Poirel, Camille Tinguely Patrice Nordmann. A Resazurin Reduction-Based Assay for Rapid Detection of Polymyxin Resistance in Acinetobacter baumannii and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Clin Microbiol. 2019 Feb 27;57(3).
17. Fonseca E Silva D, Silva-Dias A, Gomes R, MartinsOliveira I, Ramos MH, Rodrigues AG, Cantón R, PinaVaz C. Evaluation of rapid colistin susceptibility directly from positive blood cultures using a flow cytometry assay. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2019;54(6):820-3.
18. Matuschek E, Ahman J, Webster C, Kahlmeter G. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing of colistin - evaluation of seven commercial MIC products against standard sıvı microdilution for Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Acinetobacter spp. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2018;24(8):865-87.
19. Asar L, Pfefferle S, Lütgehetmann M, Hoffmann A, Katchanov J, Aepfelbacher M, Rohde H, Maurer FP. Influence of local epidemiology on the performance of common colistin drug susceptibility testing methods. PLoS One. 2019;14(6):e0217468.
20. Akin FE, Bayram A, Balci I. Comparison of disc diffusion, E-test, and sıvı microdilution methods for the determination of resistance to colistin, polymyxin B, and tigecycline in multi-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii isolates. Mikrobiyol Bul. 2010;44(2):203-10.
21. Behera B, Mathur P, Das AKapil A, Gupta B, Bhoi S, Farooque K, Sharma V, Misra MC.Evaluation of susceptibility testing methods for polymyxin. Int J Infect Dis. 2010;14(7):e596-601.
22. Lo-Ten-Foe JR, de Smet AM, Diederen BM, Kluytmans JA, vanKeulen PH. Comparative evaluation of the VITEK 2, disk diffusion, etest, sıvı microdilution, and agar dilution susceptibility testing methods for colistin in clinical isolates, including heteroresistant Enterobacter cloacae and Acinetobacter baumannii strains. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2007;51(10):3726-30.
23. van der Heijden IM, Levin AS, De Pedri EH, Fung L, Rossi F, Duboc G, Barone AA, Costa SF. Comparison of disc diffusion, E test and sıvı microdilution for testing susceptibility of carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosa to polymyxins. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob. 2007 Aug;6:8.
24. Mehri Haeili, Mahsa Kafshdouz, Zeinab Pishnian, Mohammad Mehdi Feizabadi, Luis Martinez-Martinez. Comparison of susceptibility testing methods for determining the activity of colistin against Gram-negative bacilli of clinical origin. J Med Microbiol. 2019 Jan;68(1):60-6.
25. Galani I, Adamou P, Karaiskos I, Giamarellou H, Souli M. Evaluation of ComASP™ Colistin (formerly SensiTest™ Colistin), a commercial sıvı microdilution-based method to evaluate the colistin minimum inhibitory concentration for carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates. J Glob Antimicrob Resist. 2018 Dec;15:123-6.
26. Pfennigwerth N, Kaminski A, Korte-Berwanger M, Pfeifer Y, Simon M, Werner G, Jantsch J, Marlinghaus L, Gatermann SG. Evaluation of six commercial products for colistin susceptibility testing in Enterobacterales. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2019 Nov;25(11):1385-89.
27. Chew KL(1), La MV(2), Lin RTP(3)(4), Teo JWP(3) Colistin and Polymyxin B Susceptibility Testing for Carbapenem-Resistant and mcr-Positive Enterobacteriaceae: Comparison of Sensititre, MicroScan, Vitek 2,and Etest with Sıvı Microdilution. J Clin Microbiol. 2017;55(9):2609-16.s
28. Piewngam P, Kiratisin P. Comparative assessment of antimicrobial susceptibility testing for tigecycline and colistin against Acinetobacter baumannii clinical isolates, including multidrug-resistant isolates.Int J AntimicrobAgents. 2014;44(5):396-401.
29. Dafopoulou K, Zarkotou O, Dimitroulia E, Hadjichristodoulou C, Gennimata V, Pournaras S, Tsakris A. Comparative Evaluation of Colistin Susceptibility Testing Methods among Carbapenem-Nonsusceptible Klebsiella pneumoniae and Acinetobacter baumannii Clinical Isolates. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015;59(8):4625-30.
30. Girardello R, Cury AP, Franco MRG, Di Gióia TR, de Almeida JN Jr, de Araújo MRE, da Silva Duarte AJ, Rossi F. Colistin susceptibility testing and Vitek-2™: is it really useless? Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2018 Aug;91(4):309- 11.
31. Jorgensen JH. Selection criteria for an antimicrobial susceptibility testing system. J Clin Microbiol. 1993;31(11):2841-4.