ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2026
Performance evaluation of antimicrobial susceptibility testing methods for ceftazidime-avibactam and imipenem-relebactam against Klebsiella pneumoniae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa.
Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCarbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae (CR-KP) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (CR-PA) present critical therapeutic challenges. Ceftazidime-avibactam (CAZ-AVI) and imipenem-relebactam (IMI-REL) are key treatment options, but optimal susceptibility testing methods and local resistance mechanisms need clarification.
methodsA total of 108 CR‑KP and 102 CR‑PA non‑duplicate clinical isolates (June 2025-February 2026) were tested. Susceptibility to CAZ‑AVI and IMI‑REL was determined by broth microdilution (BMD, reference method), gradient diffusion, and Kirby‑Bauer (K‑B) disk diffusion. Essential agreement (EA), categorical agreement (CA), and error rates were calculated. Carbapenemase types were detected by immunochromatography (CARBA5).
resultsBy BMD, CAZ-AVI susceptibility rates were 88.9% for CR-KP and 96.1% for CR-PA; IMI-REL susceptibility rates were 84.3% and 75.5%, respectively. For CAZ-AVI, gradient diffusion showed excellent CA with BMD (99.1% for CR-KP and 94.1% for CR-PA) and EA of 91.7% and 97.1%, respectively. In contrast, gradient diffusion for IMI-REL was suboptimal (CA 94.4% and EA 86.1% for CR-KP, and CA 84.3% and EA 87.3% for CR-PA). K-B disk diffusion performed poorly for IMI-REL (CA 75.0% for CR-KP and 77.5% for CR-PA; minor errors rates were 24.1% and 20.6%, respectively).
conclusionCAZ-AVI and IMI-REL retain potent in vitro activity against contemporary CR-KP and CR-PA isolates. Gradient diffusion is a reliable alternative to BMD for ceftazidime-avibactam, whereas its accuracy is limited for imipenem-relebactam. K-B disk diffusion for IMI-REL is associated with unacceptably high error rates; reference method confirmation is recommended for isolates yielding non-susceptible results by this method.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42423841What 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.