The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2025
Comparative evaluation of disc diffusion and Liofilchem™ MTS strip methods with broth microdilution for cefepime/enmetazobactam susceptibility testing.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеОценочное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Emeraud Cécile, De Swardt Hippolyte, Bernabeu Sandrine, Latour Lena, Pages Alice, Ronsin Sarah, Bonnin Rémy A, Dortet Laurent
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Cefepime/enmetazobactam is a newly approved β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitor combination with promising activity against MDR Gram-negative Enterobacterales, particularly ESBL- and OXA-48-producing isolates. Reliable susceptibility testing methods are essential to guide its clinical use.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the performance of two commercial cefepime/enmetazobactam susceptibility testing methods, disc diffusion and Liofilchem™ MTS gradient strips, using broth microdilution (BMD) as the gold standard.
METHODS: A total of 291 carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales isolates, including 194 carbapenemase producers, were included. Susceptibility testing was performed using BMD, disc diffusion and Liofilchem™ MTS strips. Results were interpreted following EUCAST and FDA 2025 breakpoints. Essential agreement (EA) and bias were calculated for gradient strip methods according to the ISO 20776-2021 guideline, whereas categorical agreement (CA), very major errors (VMEs) and major errors (MEs) were determined for disc diffusion according to the ISO 20776-2:2007 guideline.
RESULTS: The disc diffusion method demonstrated high CA (93.8% EUCAST, 95.9% FDA). VME rates exceeded acceptable thresholds using EUCAST breakpoints (20.8%) but were within limits for FDA (1.9%). Liofilchem™ MTS strips achieved 88.3% (95% CI: 84.1%-91.5%) EA and a bias of -8.9%. Both methods accurately detected susceptibility in OXA-48-producing isolates but showed limitations for isolates close to the MIC breakpoints.
CONCLUSIONS: Disc diffusion and Liofilchem™ MTS strips represent reliable alternatives to BMD for routine cefepime/enmetazobactam testing.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the performance of two commercial cefepime/enmetazobactam susceptibility testing methods, disc diffusion and Liofilchem™ MTS gradient strips, using broth microdilution (BMD) as the gold standard.
METHODS: A total of 291 carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales isolates, including 194 carbapenemase producers, were included. Susceptibility testing was performed using BMD, disc diffusion and Liofilchem™ MTS strips. Results were interpreted following EUCAST and FDA 2025 breakpoints. Essential agreement (EA) and bias were calculated for gradient strip methods according to the ISO 20776-2021 guideline, whereas categorical agreement (CA), very major errors (VMEs) and major errors (MEs) were determined for disc diffusion according to the ISO 20776-2:2007 guideline.
RESULTS: The disc diffusion method demonstrated high CA (93.8% EUCAST, 95.9% FDA). VME rates exceeded acceptable thresholds using EUCAST breakpoints (20.8%) but were within limits for FDA (1.9%). Liofilchem™ MTS strips achieved 88.3% (95% CI: 84.1%-91.5%) EA and a bias of -8.9%. Both methods accurately detected susceptibility in OXA-48-producing isolates but showed limitations for isolates close to the MIC breakpoints.
CONCLUSIONS: Disc diffusion and Liofilchem™ MTS strips represent reliable alternatives to BMD for routine cefepime/enmetazobactam testing.