4.3 Article

Evaluation of rapid polymyxin NP test to detect colistin-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae isolated in a tertiary Greek hospital

期刊

JOURNAL OF MICROBIOLOGICAL METHODS
卷 153, 期 -, 页码 35-39

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.mimet.2018.08.010

关键词

Enterobacteriaceae; Carbapenemases; Broth-microdilution method; VITEK (R) 2; BD Phoenix (TM)

资金

  1. Research Committee of the University of Thessaly, Greece

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The efficiency of Rapid Polymyxin NP test for detection of colistin-resistant isolates was tested against a collection of 131 non-repetitive Klebsiella pneumoniae, including 98 colistin-resistant and 33 colistin-susceptible isolates. In addition, the performance of this test was compared with those of the automated systems, BD Phoenix (TM) and VITEK (R) 2, and the Etest. Determination of imipenem and meropenem MICs showed that 95 of colistin-resistant (Col-R) isolates were also resistant to at least one carbapenem. Characterization of colistin resistance mechanisms showed that 75 out of 98 Col-R isolates were associated with the presence of alterations in the mgrB gene, while no mcr genes were detected among our isolates. Rapid Polymyxin NP correctly detected 97 out of 98 colistin-resistant isolates (Geometric mean MIC value 9.89 mg/L), except one ST147 K. pneumoniae harboring a wild-type mgrB gene (MIC: 8 mg/L), yielding a sensitivity 99%. The other methods gave more false negative results with colistin-resistant strains; BD Phoenix (TM),VITEK (R) 2, and the gradient Etest missed five, two and three colistin-resistant, respectively (95%, 98% and 97%). The Rapid Polymyxin NP test gave false positive results with six isolates, for which colistin MICs were 1-2 mg/L (specificity 82%). Despite the fact that Rapid Polymyxin exhibited lower specificity than other methods (82% versus 94%, 88% and 85%), it is easy-to-perform and rapid. Thus, these findings indicate that the Rapid Polymyxin NP test can be an initial tool for the detection of colistin-resistant isolates.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据