Back to Search Start Over

Different Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing Methods to Determine Vancomycin Susceptibility and MIC for Staphylococcus aureus with Reduced Vancomycin Susceptibility

Authors :
Hae-Sun Chung
Miae Lee
Source :
Diagnostics, Vol 12, Iss 4, p 845 (2022)
Publication Year :
2022
Publisher :
MDPI AG, 2022.

Abstract

The methods and results obtained using commercialized automation systems used for antimicrobial susceptibility testing are not entirely consistent. Therefore, we evaluated different antimicrobial susceptibility testing methods to determine vancomycin susceptibility and minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) for Staphylococcus aureus with reduced vancomycin susceptibility (SA-RVS). A total of 128 clinical isolates of S. aureus were tested, including 99 isolates showing an MIC of ≥2 µg/mL using the VITEK2 system (VITEK2). Antimicrobial susceptibility tests were performed using the Sensititre system (Sensititre), Phoenix M50 system (Phoenix), and MicroScan WalkAway 96 Plus system (MicroScan). Vancomycin MICs were determined using the broth microdilution method (BMD) and Etest. Essential agreement and category agreement for each method were compared with BMD results as the reference method. The BMD and Etest showed complete essential agreement (100%). VITEK2, Sensititre, and Phoenix showed high essential agreement (>99%), while MicroScan showed the lowest essential agreement (92.2%). The MIC MICs determined via Etest, VITEK2, and MicroScan tended to be higher than that determined via BMD. When comparing BMD with Etest, the category agreement was 93.8% and minor errors were observed for eight isolates. VITEK2, Sensititre, and Phoenix showed category agreements of 96.1%, 96.1%, and 99.2%, respectively, while MicroScan showed the lowest category agreement of 85.2%. The determination of vancomycin susceptibility and MIC for S. aureus varied among the methods. Caution should be taken when interpreting RVS and intermediate results for S. aureus. For confirmation of SA-RVS results, it would be appropriate to test with BMD or a more reliable testing method.

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
20754418
Volume :
12
Issue :
4
Database :
Directory of Open Access Journals
Journal :
Diagnostics
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
edsdoj.3e4eb0459ae1484dae05b376128eb35f
Document Type :
article
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12040845