Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30053113›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy2018

Performance of the EUCAST disc diffusion method and two MIC methods in detection of Enterobacteriaceae with reduced susceptibility to meropenem: the NordicAST CPE study.

Bjørg Haldorsen, Christian G Giske, Dennis S Hansen, Kristjan Orri Helgason, Gunnar Kahlmeter, Iren H Löhr, Erika Matuschek, Monica Österblad, Kaisu Rantakokko-Jalava, Mikala Wang and 4 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 38% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Emergence of pandrug-resistant carbapenemase-producingFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024
    Article
  5. Nationwide, population-based observational study of the molecular epidemiology and temporal trend of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales in Norway, 2015 to 2021.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2023
    Observational
  6. New microbes and new infections · 2021
    Article
  7. Current Evidence forMicroorganisms · 2021
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Carbapenemase-producingCanadian journal of veterinary research = Revue canadienne de recherche veterinaire · 2020
    Review
  11. The Global Ascendency of OXA-48-Type Carbapenemases.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2019
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 10 institutions in 5 countries.

Bjørg HaldorsenNorwegian National Advisory Unit on Detection of Antimicrobial Resistance, Department of Microbiology and Infection Control, University Hospital of North Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
Christian G GiskeDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Dennis S HansenDepartment of Clinical Microbiology, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Herlev, Denmark.
Kristjan Orri HelgasonDepartment of Clinical Microbiology, Landspitali University Hospital, Reykjavik, Iceland.
Gunnar KahlmeterEUCAST Development Laboratory, Växjö, Sweden.
Iren H LöhrDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Norway.
Erika MatuschekEUCAST Development Laboratory, Växjö, Sweden.
Monica ÖsterbladBacterial Infections Unit, National Institute for Health and Welfare, Turku, Finland.
Kaisu Rantakokko-JalavaClinical Microbiology Laboratory, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland.
Mikala WangDepartment of Clinical Microbiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Lars SmåbrekkeDepartment of Pharmacy, Faculty of Health Sciences, UiT - the Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
Ørjan SamuelsenNorwegian National Advisory Unit on Detection of Antimicrobial Resistance, Department of Microbiology and Infection Control, University Hospital of North Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
Arnfinn SundsfjordNorwegian National Advisory Unit on Detection of Antimicrobial Resistance, Department of Microbiology and Infection Control, University Hospital of North Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
NordicAST CPE Study Group
Gentofte Hospital · DKUniversity Hospital of North Norway · NOFinnish Institute for Health and Welfare · FIVäxjö Kommun · SEAarhus University Hospital · DKKarolinska Institutet · SEReykjavík University · ISStavanger University Hospital · NOTurku University Hospital · FIUiT The Arctic University of Norway · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: To examine performance of EUCAST disc diffusion and supplementary MIC methods for detection of Enterobacteriaceae with reduced susceptibility to meropenem using EUCAST screening recommendations. Methods: Sixty-one Nordic laboratories delivered data on EUCAST disc diffusion (n = 61), semi-automated meropenem MIC (n = 23; VITEK2, n = 20 and Phoenix, n = 3) and gradient meropenem MIC (n = 58) methods. The strains (n = 27) included the major carbapenemase classes (A, n = 4; B, n = 9; D, n = 6) involved in the global spread of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (CPE) and non-CPE strains (n = 8) covering a range of broth microdilution (BMD) meropenem MICs. Results: A triplicate Klebsiella variicola (meropenem MIC 0.5 mg/L) harbouring OXA-48 and Escherichia coli ATCC 25922 showed an overall good precision. Meropenem zone diameters below the EUCAST screening cut-off (<27 mm) were reported for strains with MIC ≥1 mg/L (n = 21), irrespective of resistance mechanism. For three strains (MIC = 0.5 mg/L) with OXA-48/-181, eight laboratories provided meropenem zone diameters above the screening cut-off. Very major errors (VMEs) were not observed. The overall distributions of major errors (MEs) and minor errors (mEs) were 9% and 36% (disc diffusion), 26% and 18% (VITEK2) and 7% and 20% (gradient MIC), respectively. Differences in ME and mE distributions between disc diffusion and MIC gradient tests compared with semi-automated methods were significant (P < 0.0001), using BMD MICs as a reference for categorization. Conclusions: The EUCAST disc diffusion method is a robust method to screen for CPE but isolates with meropenem MICs <1 mg/L pose challenges. The high ME rate in semi-automated methods might deter appropriate use of carbapenems in CPE infections with limited therapeutic options.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsBacterial Proteinsbeta-LactamasesCarbapenem-Resistant EnterobacteriaceaeCarbapenemsClinical Laboratory TechniquesDisk Diffusion Antimicrobial TestsEnterobacteriaceaeEscherichia coliHumansKlebsiellaMeropenemMicrobial Sensitivity TestsAnti-Bacterial AgentsBacterial Proteinsbeta-LactamasescarbapenemaseCarbapenemsMeropenem

Identifiers

PMID30053113
PMCPMC6148324
OpenAlexW2884121283

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.