ArticleThe Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy2019
Comparison of VITEK® 2, three different gradient strip tests and broth microdilution for detecting vanB-positive Enterococcus faecium isolates with low vancomycin MICs.
Article in The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Emergence of a Novel, Phenotypically Difficult-to-Detect Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus faecium Clone (ST117/CT7799).MicrobiologyOpen · 2026Article
- Automated molecular detection of the vancomycin resistance genes vanA and vanB using the geneLEAD VIII platform.Access microbiology · 2025Article
- SERS-based rapid susceptibility testing of commonly administered antibiotics on clinically important bacteria species directly from blood culture of bacteremia patients.World journal of microbiology & biotechnology · 2023Article
- Vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) in hospital settings across European borders: a scoping review comparing the epidemiology in the Netherlands and Germany.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2023Article
- Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing for Enterococci.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesIn 2018, EUCAST issued a warning regarding unreliable results of gradient strip tests for confirming vancomycin resistance in enterococci. We compared the performance of various diagnostic standard and confirmatory tests to identify and determine vanB-type vancomycin resistance.
methodsWe analysed a collection of vanB-positive Enterococcus faecium isolates (n = 68) with low vancomycin MICs and compared the performance of VITEK® 2 (bioMérieux), broth microdilution and three gradient strip tests from different providers (Oxoid, Liofilchem and bioMérieux). For the latter we compared the standard procedure with a protocol with increased inoculum, a rich agar medium and a longer incubation time ('macromethod').
resultsThe sensitivity of VITEK® 2 was 81% compared with 72% for broth microdilution and 61%-63% for the three gradient strip tests using standard conditions. The macromethod substantially improved the performance of all strip tests resulting in a sensitivity of 89%-96% after 48 h of incubation.
conclusionsWe recommend that EUCAST changes the present warning against the general use of MIC strips. When MIC strips are used to either exclude or confirm suspected vancomycin resistance in E. faecium, and a PCR is not available, the macromethod should be employed. For clinically relevant enterococci, where a rapid therapeutic decision is needed, a molecular test (e.g. PCR) should be favoured in order to save time and to further increase sensitivity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.