Comparison of Meropenem MIC by E Test and VITEK 2 in Resistant Pseudomonas and Acinetobacter Isolates

<p><em>P.aruginosa</em> and <em>A.baumannii</em> have evolved causing serious infections especially in health care institutions. Most of them are multidrug resistant and even resistant to meropenem which is a broad spectrum beta lactam antimicrobial used for treatment o...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Jananie Kottahachchi, Joan Faoagali, Sharon Kleinschmidt
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Sri Lankan Society for Microbiology 2012-01-01
Series:Sri Lankan Journal of Infectious Diseases
Subjects:
Online Access:https://sljid.sljol.info/articles/3667
_version_ 1798022980802969600
author Jananie Kottahachchi
Joan Faoagali
Sharon Kleinschmidt
author_facet Jananie Kottahachchi
Joan Faoagali
Sharon Kleinschmidt
author_sort Jananie Kottahachchi
collection DOAJ
description <p><em>P.aruginosa</em> and <em>A.baumannii</em> have evolved causing serious infections especially in health care institutions. Most of them are multidrug resistant and even resistant to meropenem which is a broad spectrum beta lactam antimicrobial used for treatment of critical infections. Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of an antibiotic is determined to decide on the specific treatment and several methods of detecting MIC are adopted. Routing conduction of such methods is cumbersome for clinical laboratories and currently introduced VITEK 2 automated method is an alternative. The aims of the study were,</p><p>-To compare the E test and VITEK 2 system for the susceptibility testing of resistant <em>Pseudomonas aeruginosa </em>and <em>Acinetobacter baumannii </em>for meropenem  and,</p><p>-To compare the effect of four carbapenem antibiotics on <em>Pseudomonas aeruginosa </em>and <em>Acinetobacter baumannii</em>. For that 75 <em>P. aeruginosa</em> and 25 <em>A. baumanii </em>were collected randomly from the collection of isolates at Princess Alexandra Hospital, Australia. E test and VITEK 2 MIC done for the each isolate according to the manufacturer’s instructions and the latest CLSI guidelines (June, 2010). VITEK-2 MICs corresponded closely with those obtained with the E test method. Categorical Agreement testing for both the organisms was 92% with no major errors and 08% minor error. We conclude that VITEK 2 is a reliable method to detect MIC in <em>P. aeruginosa </em>and<em> A. baumanii. </em>Meropenem MICs for <em>A. baumannii </em>with the VITEK 2 system usually follow pattern a very similar to <em>P. aeruginosa. </em>Doripenem sensitivity results can be extrapolated from meropenem. And ertapenem resistance to  <em>P. aeruginosa </em>and<em> A. baumanii </em>is<em> </em> confirmed.</p><p>DOI: <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.4038/sljid.v2i1.3667">http://dx.doi.org/10.4038/sljid.v2i1.3667</a></p><p><em>Sri Lankan Journal of Infectious Diseases </em>Vol.2(1) 2012: 28-35</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p>
first_indexed 2024-04-11T17:38:45Z
format Article
id doaj.art-450f047fa6a5462fa60bad0e4d4857b7
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2012-8169
2448-9654
language English
last_indexed 2024-04-11T17:38:45Z
publishDate 2012-01-01
publisher Sri Lankan Society for Microbiology
record_format Article
series Sri Lankan Journal of Infectious Diseases
spelling doaj.art-450f047fa6a5462fa60bad0e4d4857b72022-12-22T04:11:32ZengSri Lankan Society for MicrobiologySri Lankan Journal of Infectious Diseases2012-81692448-96542012-01-0121283510.4038/sljid.v2i1.36673372Comparison of Meropenem MIC by E Test and VITEK 2 in Resistant Pseudomonas and Acinetobacter IsolatesJananie Kottahachchi0Joan Faoagali1Sharon Kleinschmidt2Sri Jayewardenepura UniversityPrincess Alexandra HospitalPrincess Alexandra Hospital<p><em>P.aruginosa</em> and <em>A.baumannii</em> have evolved causing serious infections especially in health care institutions. Most of them are multidrug resistant and even resistant to meropenem which is a broad spectrum beta lactam antimicrobial used for treatment of critical infections. Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of an antibiotic is determined to decide on the specific treatment and several methods of detecting MIC are adopted. Routing conduction of such methods is cumbersome for clinical laboratories and currently introduced VITEK 2 automated method is an alternative. The aims of the study were,</p><p>-To compare the E test and VITEK 2 system for the susceptibility testing of resistant <em>Pseudomonas aeruginosa </em>and <em>Acinetobacter baumannii </em>for meropenem  and,</p><p>-To compare the effect of four carbapenem antibiotics on <em>Pseudomonas aeruginosa </em>and <em>Acinetobacter baumannii</em>. For that 75 <em>P. aeruginosa</em> and 25 <em>A. baumanii </em>were collected randomly from the collection of isolates at Princess Alexandra Hospital, Australia. E test and VITEK 2 MIC done for the each isolate according to the manufacturer’s instructions and the latest CLSI guidelines (June, 2010). VITEK-2 MICs corresponded closely with those obtained with the E test method. Categorical Agreement testing for both the organisms was 92% with no major errors and 08% minor error. We conclude that VITEK 2 is a reliable method to detect MIC in <em>P. aeruginosa </em>and<em> A. baumanii. </em>Meropenem MICs for <em>A. baumannii </em>with the VITEK 2 system usually follow pattern a very similar to <em>P. aeruginosa. </em>Doripenem sensitivity results can be extrapolated from meropenem. And ertapenem resistance to  <em>P. aeruginosa </em>and<em> A. baumanii </em>is<em> </em> confirmed.</p><p>DOI: <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.4038/sljid.v2i1.3667">http://dx.doi.org/10.4038/sljid.v2i1.3667</a></p><p><em>Sri Lankan Journal of Infectious Diseases </em>Vol.2(1) 2012: 28-35</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p>https://sljid.sljol.info/articles/3667meropenemmicvitek 2pseudomonas aeruginosaacinetobacter baumanii
spellingShingle Jananie Kottahachchi
Joan Faoagali
Sharon Kleinschmidt
Comparison of Meropenem MIC by E Test and VITEK 2 in Resistant Pseudomonas and Acinetobacter Isolates
Sri Lankan Journal of Infectious Diseases
meropenem
mic
vitek 2
pseudomonas aeruginosa
acinetobacter baumanii
title Comparison of Meropenem MIC by E Test and VITEK 2 in Resistant Pseudomonas and Acinetobacter Isolates
title_full Comparison of Meropenem MIC by E Test and VITEK 2 in Resistant Pseudomonas and Acinetobacter Isolates
title_fullStr Comparison of Meropenem MIC by E Test and VITEK 2 in Resistant Pseudomonas and Acinetobacter Isolates
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Meropenem MIC by E Test and VITEK 2 in Resistant Pseudomonas and Acinetobacter Isolates
title_short Comparison of Meropenem MIC by E Test and VITEK 2 in Resistant Pseudomonas and Acinetobacter Isolates
title_sort comparison of meropenem mic by e test and vitek 2 in resistant pseudomonas and acinetobacter isolates
topic meropenem
mic
vitek 2
pseudomonas aeruginosa
acinetobacter baumanii
url https://sljid.sljol.info/articles/3667
work_keys_str_mv AT jananiekottahachchi comparisonofmeropenemmicbyetestandvitek2inresistantpseudomonasandacinetobacterisolates
AT joanfaoagali comparisonofmeropenemmicbyetestandvitek2inresistantpseudomonasandacinetobacterisolates
AT sharonkleinschmidt comparisonofmeropenemmicbyetestandvitek2inresistantpseudomonasandacinetobacterisolates