Rapid antibiotic susceptibility testing in blood culture diagnostics performed by direct inoculation using the VITEK®-2 and BD Phoenix™ platforms
- 55 Downloads
Early availability of microbiological results can improve treatment decisions of patients suffering from bloodstream infections. Direct inoculation of automated susceptibility testing (AST) platforms is an approach to shorten time-to-result in blood culture diagnostics. We performed a comparative evaluation of the two commercial AST systems VITEK®-2 and BD Phoenix™ for the direct inoculation with blood culture samples. Furthermore, two different methods of sample preparation were compared in this study. Positive blood cultures were prepared for direct inoculation by use of serum separator tubes and twofold centrifugation. AST was performed with the VITEK®-2 and the BD Phoenix™ system by the standard method according to the manufacturer’s recommendations using subcultures on solid media and by direct inoculation of blood culture samples. A hundred clinical samples from blood cultures were included in this study. Rapid AST by direct inoculation showed inter-test agreement rates ranging from 92.45 to 97.7%. Comparing both AST platforms, the VITEK®-2 system demonstrated a higher test accuracy for direct inoculation. No relevant difference was observed for the two different sample preparation methods. Direct inoculation is an easy and inexpensive approach to obtain early full panel phenotypic AST results in blood culture diagnostics. Sample preparation is sufficiently performed by a simple centrifugation method. Both commercial platforms, the VITEK®-2 and the BD Phoenix™, have proven suitable for the use of direct inoculation.
The study was financed by internal funding.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This study has been approved by the local research ethics committee (5358-11/17).
- 1.Fleischmann C, Thomas-Rueddel DO, Hartmann M, Hartog CS, Welte T, Heublein S et al (2016) Hospital incidence and mortality rates of sepsis. Dtsch Arztebl Int 113(10):159–166Google Scholar
- 5.Ferrer R, Martin-Loeches I, Phillips G, Osborn TM, Townsend S, Dellinger RP et al (2014) Empiric antibiotic treatment reduces mortality in severe sepsis and septic shock from the first hour: results from a guideline-based performance improvement program. Crit Care Med 42(8):1749–1755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Tabak YP, Vankeepuram L, Ye G, Jeffers K, Gupta V, Murray PR (2018) Blood culture turnaround time in US acute care hospitals and implications for laboratory process optimization. J Clin Microbiol 56(12). https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.00500-18
- 8.Sinha M, Jupe J, Mack H, Coleman TP, Lawrence SM, Fraley SI (2018) Emerging technologies for molecular diagnosis of sepsis. Clin Microbiol Rev 31(2). https://doi.org/10.1128/CMR.00089-17
- 9.Tan KE, Ellis BC, Lee R, Stamper PD, Zhang SX, Carroll KC (2012) Prospective evaluation of a matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry system in a hospital clinical microbiology laboratory for identification of bacteria and yeasts: a bench-by-bench study for assessing the impact on time to identification and cost-effectiveness. J Clin Microbiol 50(10):3301–3308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Habib G, Lancellotti P, Antunes MJ, Bongiorni MG, Casalta JP, Del Zotti F et al (2015) 2015 ESC guidelines for the management of infective endocarditis: the task force for the management of infective endocarditis of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Endorsed by: European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS), the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM). Eur Heart J 36(44):3075–3128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Jorgensen JH (1993) Selection criteria for an antimicrobial susceptibility testing system. J Clin Microbiol 31(11):2841–2844Google Scholar
- 17.Tian Y, Zheng B, Wang B, Lin Y, Li M (2016) Rapid identification and multiple susceptibility testing of pathogens from positive-culture sterile body fluids by a combined MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry and Vitek susceptibility system. Front Microbiol 7:523Google Scholar
- 19.Quesada MD, Gimenez M, Molinos S, Fernandez G, Sanchez MD, Rivelo R et al (2010) Performance of VITEK-2 Compact and overnight MicroScan panels for direct identification and susceptibility testing of Gram-negative bacilli from positive FAN BacT/ALERT blood culture bottles. Clin Microbiol Infect 16(2):137–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Gherardi G, Angeletti S, Panitti M, Pompilio A, Di Bonaventura G, Crea F et al (2012) Comparative evaluation of the Vitek-2 Compact and Phoenix systems for rapid identification and antibiotic susceptibility testing directly from blood cultures of Gram-negative and Gram-positive isolates. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 72(1):20–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Wimmer JL, Long SW, Cernoch P, Land GA, Davis JR, Musser JM et al (2012) Strategy for rapid identification and antibiotic susceptibility testing of gram-negative bacteria directly recovered from positive blood cultures using the Bruker MALDI Biotyper and the BD Phoenix system. J Clin Microbiol 50(7):2452–2454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.Machen A, Drake T, Wang YF (2014) Same day identification and full panel antimicrobial susceptibility testing of bacteria from positive blood culture bottles made possible by a combined lysis-filtration method with MALDI-TOF VITEK mass spectrometry and the VITEK2 system. PLoS One 9(2):e87870CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.Romero-Gomez MP, Gomez-Gil R, Pano-Pardo JR, Mingorance J (2012) Identification and susceptibility testing of microorganism by direct inoculation from positive blood culture bottles by combining MALDI-TOF and Vitek-2 Compact is rapid and effective. J Inf Secur 65(6):513–520Google Scholar
- 31.Fritzenwanker M, Imirzalioglu C, Herold S, Wagenlehner FM, Zimmer KP, Chakraborty T (2018) Treatment options for carbapenem- resistant gram-negative infections. Dtsch Arztebl Int 115(20–21):345–352Google Scholar