Stop Waiting for Tomorrow: Early Disk Diffusion—An Accurate Method for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing With Reduced Turnaround Time

2019 ◽  
Vol 152 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S32-S32
Author(s):  
Daniel Webber ◽  
Meghan Wallace ◽  
Carey-Ann Burnham

Abstract Background Disk diffusion is a slow but reliable reference method for measuring antimicrobial susceptibility. Our objective was to improve the turnaround time for this method by reducing the culture incubation period prior to disk diffusion testing (referred to as early disk diffusion [eDD] testing). Methods Clinical isolates (n = 13) and quality control (QC) strains (n = 8) of bacteria, including 6 Staphylococcus aureus, 3 Enterococcus faecium, 3 Enterococcus faecalis, 3 Escherichia coli, 3 Pseudomonas aeruginosa, 2 Klebsiella pneumoniae, and 1 Enterobacter cloacae, were inoculated on blood agar by quadrant streaking and were incubated at 35○C for 6 hours (eDD6), 10 hours (eDD10), or 24 hours (standard [sDD]) before disk diffusion testing was set up in accordance with CLSI guidelines using Mueller Hinton Agar (Hardy Diagnostics) and clinically appropriate antimicrobial agents (total: 24). Experiments were performed sequentially in triplicate with zones measured by two independent readers. Results Examination of 6-hour blood agar plates showed limited growth in the first 1 to 2 quadrants while 10-hour growth plates had 4-quadrant growth and individual colonies in most cases. Despite limited growth on 6-hour plates, there were adequate bacteria to produce a 0.5 McFarland standard for disk diffusion testing for all 126 eDD replicates. Results were evaluable for 1,206 of 1,206 (100%) of eDD and 603 of 603 (100%) of standard disk diffusion (sDD). A comparison of early vs standard disk diffusion showed that eDD6 had 3 of 154 (1.9%) very major errors and 6 of 449 (1.3%) major errors, whereas eDD10 had no very major errors and 3 of 449 (0.7%) minor errors. Very major errors in eDD6 included a 1-mm difference between eDD6 and sDD for cefoxitin inhibition of S aureus as well as 4- and 6-mm differences between eDD6 replicates and sDD for nitrofurantoin inhibition of E cloacae. There was similar categorical agreement of eDD6 (96.7%) and eDD10 (96.7%) with sDD. Overall, there was a very good correlation of eDD6 (r2 = 0.98) and eDD10 (r2 = 0.99) with sDD. When grouping results by bacterial species, there was no more than 1-mm difference in median antimicrobial inhibition between eDD6, eDD10, and sDD. Of note, 5 of 7 bacterial species had the same median zone size when comparing eDD6 or eDD10 with sDD. There was also very little difference between early and standard methods when examining bacteria-drug combinations, with a similar zone size (difference in mode <2 mm) in 67 of 69 (97%) eDD6 and 66 of 69 (96%) eDD10 compared to sDD. Test results for QC isolates agreed with the CLSI recommended ranges in 97 of 99 (98%) eDD6, 97 of 99 (98%) eDD10, and 96 of 99 (97%) sDD. Conclusion Early disk diffusion testing is a simple and accurate method of antimicrobial susceptibility testing that can reduce time to results by as much as 18 hours with no additional cost.

2000 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 1151-1155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bertha C. Hill ◽  
Carolyn N. Baker ◽  
Fred C. Tenover

Present methods of antimicrobial susceptibility testing ofBordetella pertussis are time consuming and require specialized media that are not commercially available. We tested 52 isolates of B. pertussis for resistance to erythromycin, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, chloramphenicol, and rifampin by agar dilution with Bordet-Gengou agar (BGA) containing 20% horse blood (reference method), Etest using BGA and Regan-Lowe agar without cephalexin (RL−C), and disk diffusion using BGA and RL−C. The organisms tested included four erythromycin-resistant isolates ofB. pertussis from a single patient, a second erythromycin-resistant strain of B. pertussis from an unrelated patient in another state, and 47 nasopharyngeal surveillance isolates of B. pertussis from children in the western United States. The results of agar dilution testing using direct inoculation of the organisms suspended in Mueller-Hinton broth were within ±1 dilution of those obtained after overnight passage of the inoculum in Stainer-Scholte medium, which is the traditional method of testing B. pertussis. The Etest method produced MICs similar to those of the agar dilution reference method for three of the four antimicrobial agents tested; the trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole results were lower with Etest, particularly when the direct suspension method was used. Most of the Etest MICs, except for that of erythromycin, were on scale. Disk diffusion testing using RL−C medium was helpful in identifying the erythromycin-resistant strains, which produced no zone of inhibition around the disk; susceptible isolates produced zones of at least 42 mm. Thus, the antimicrobial susceptibility testing of B. pertussis can be simplified by using the Etest or disk diffusion on RL−C to screen for erythromycin-resistant isolates of B. pertussis.


2018 ◽  
Vol 56 (8) ◽  
Author(s):  
Romney M. Humphries ◽  
Susan Kircher ◽  
Andrea Ferrell ◽  
Kevin M. Krause ◽  
Rianna Malherbe ◽  
...  

ABSTRACTExpedited pathways to antimicrobial agent approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have led to increased delays between drug approval and the availability of FDA-cleared antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) devices. Antimicrobial disks for use with disk diffusion testing are among the first AST devices available to clinical laboratories. However, many laboratories are reluctant to implement disk diffusion testing for a variety of reasons, including dwindling proficiency with this method, interruptions of the laboratory workflow, uncertainty surrounding the quality and reliability of disk diffusion tests, and a perceived need to report MIC values to clinicians. This minireview provides a report from the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute Methods Development and Standardization Working Group on the current standards and clinical utility of disk diffusion testing.


2018 ◽  
Vol 56 (4) ◽  
pp. e01999-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher D. Doern

ABSTRACT Antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) provides critical information for the management of patients with infections. The gold standard methods for assessing organism susceptibility are still based on growth and require incubation over relatively long periods of time. Until now, little progress has been made in developing rapid, growth-based, phenotypic AST systems. This commentary puts the recently FDA-cleared Accelerate PhenoTest (P. Pancholi et al., J Clin Microbiol 56:e01329-17, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.01329-17) in context by providing a historical perspective on attempts to accelerate phenotypic susceptibility results. In addition, some promising new innovations that promise to shorten the turnaround time for phenotypic AST will be briefly reviewed.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. e0159183 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evgeny A. Idelevich ◽  
Karsten Becker ◽  
Janne Schmitz ◽  
Dennis Knaack ◽  
Georg Peters ◽  
...  

1996 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 337-344 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas R. Shryock ◽  
Donald W. White ◽  
J. Mitchell Staples ◽  
Carolyn S. Werner

Tilmicosin is a novel macrolide antibiotic developed for exclusive use in veterinary medicine. The first tilmicosin-containing product was approved to treat bovine respiratory disease associated with pasteurellae. The development of antimicrobial susceptibility testing guidelines for tilmicosin was predicated on the relationship of clinical efficacy studies that demonstrated a favorable therapeutic outcome, on pharmacokinetic data, and on in vitro test data, as recommended by the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS). The NCCLS-approved breakpoints for the MIC dilution testing are resistant ‡ 32 g/ml, intermediate 16 g/ml, and susceptible £ 8 g/ml. The zone of inhibition interpretive criteria for disk diffusion testing with a 15- g disk are resistant £ 10 mm, intermediate 11–13 mm, and susceptible ‡ 14 mm.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document