Your browser version may not work well with NCBI's Web applications. More information here...
1: J Antimicrob Chemother. 2007 Jan;59(1):110-3. Epub 2006 Nov 6.
Related Articles, Links
Click here to read
Efficacy of practised screening methods for detection of cephalosporin-resistant Enterobacteriaceae.

Hope R, Potz NA, Warner M, Fagan EJ, Arnold E, Livermore DM.

Centre for Infections, Health Protection Agency, 61 Colindale Avenue, London NW9 5EQ, UK. Russell.hope@hpa.org.uk

OBJECTIVES: Enterobacteriaceae with extended-spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBLs) are now widespread and simple phenotypic tests are required to detect them in diagnostic laboratories. We investigated the performance of screening methods at 16 hospitals in South-East England. METHODS: Sixteen laboratories in South-East England submitted 1195 consecutive Enterobacteriaceae isolates found to be resistant, by their routine methods, to any or all of cefpodoxime, ceftazidime and cefotaxime. These isolates were re-tested centrally with various cephalosporin/clavulanate combinations and with multiplex PCR for bla(CTX-M) and bla(AmpC) alleles. RESULTS: Screening methods among the laboratories were the following: cefpodoxime discs alone (1 site); cefpodoxime, cefotaxime and ceftazidime discs (9 sites) or agar dilution (1 site); Phoenix (2 sites), Vitek 1 (1 site) and Vitek 2 (2 sites). A total of 8% of isolates submitted based on disc tests proved fully cephalosporin-susceptible, compared with 3% sent based on tests with automated systems and none of those sent based on agar dilution tests. Among isolates submitted solely on cefpodoxime resistance 256/372 (69%) proved cephalosporin-susceptible or had only borderline resistance with no clear mechanism demonstrable; this proportion decreased to 28/160 (18%) for those submitted on the basis of resistance to ceftazidime, 18/122 (15%) for those resistant to cefotaxime and 26/496 (5%) for those resistant to both cefotaxime and ceftazidime. The inference of ESBL production by Vitek 2 had the best agreement with reference laboratory results. CONCLUSIONS: Many isolates found resistant only to cefpodoxime at the source sites proved not to have ESBLs or AmpC; screening with cefotaxime and ceftazidime allowed better specificity for identification of mechanism-based resistance, as did the automated systems. Cefpodoxime disc tests nevertheless remain a useful primary screen for laboratories prepared only to test one agent.

Publication Types:
PMID: 17090552 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]