The Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenem (KPC) β-lactamase occurs in Enterobacteriaceae and can confer resistance to all β-lactam agents including carbapenems. The enzyme may confer low-level carbapenem resistance, and the failure of susceptibility methods to identify this resistance has been reported. Automated and nonautomated methods for carbapenem susceptibility were evaluated for identification of KPC-mediated resistance. Ertapenem was a more sensitive indicator of KPC resistance than meropenem and imipenem independently of the method used. Carbapenemase production could be confirmed with the modified Hodge test.

The E Test (AB Biodisk, Solna, Sweden) is a new method for performing antimicrobial susceptibility tests. It consists of an impervious carrier (5- by 50-mm strip) with a predefined antimicrobic gradient which is placed on an inoculated agar plate and processed like a disk diffusion test. Results are generated directly as MICs from a continuous concentration gradient covering 15 twofold dilutions, and MICs are read where the edge of the inhibition zone intersects the strip. We compared the E Test with disk diffusion, broth microdilution, and agar dilution tests by using a challenge set of 195 gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria for 14 antimicrobial agents. Also, disk diffusion, broth microdilution, and agar dilution tests were compared with each other. All test method comparisons gave greater than 94% agreement for the category of susceptibility. The E Test category agreement with disk diffusion and broth microdilution was 95.1%, and with agar dilution it was 95.2%. The E Test results were as reliable as the results obtained by the standard antimicrobial susceptibility testing methods.

Detecting β-lactamase-mediated carbapenem resistance among Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates and other Enterobacteriaceae is an emerging problem. In this study, 15 bla KPC -positive Klebsiella pneumoniae that showed discrepant results for imipenem and meropenem from 4 New York City hospitals were characterized by isoelectric focusing; broth microdilution (BMD); disk diffusion (DD); and MicroScan, Phoenix, Sensititre, VITEK, and VITEK 2 automated systems. All 15 isolates were either intermediate or resistant to imipenem and meropenem by BMD; 1 was susceptible to imipenem by DD. MicroScan and Phoenix reported 1 (6.7%) and 2 (13.3%) isolates, respectively, as imipenem susceptible. VITEK and VITEK 2 reported 10 (67%) and 5 (33%) isolates, respectively, as imipenem susceptible. By Sensititre, 13 (87%) isolates were susceptible to imipenem, and 12 (80%) were susceptible to meropenem. The VITEK 2 Advanced Expert System changed 2 imipenem MIC results from >16 µg/mL to <2 µg/mL but kept the interpretation as resistant. The recognition of carbapenem-resistant K. pneumoniae continues to challenge automated susceptibility systems.

We evaluated the abilities of 10 commercially available antimicrobial susceptibility testing methods and four reference methods (agar dilution, broth microdilution, disk diffusion, and the agar screen plate) to classify enterococci correctly as vancomycin susceptible or resistant using 50 well-characterized strains of enterococci. There was a high level of agreement of category classification data obtained with broth-based systems (Sceptor, MicroMedia, Pasco, and Sensititre), agar dilution, and an antibiotic gradient method (E test) with data obtained by reference broth microdilution; no very major or major errors were seen, and minor errors were Յ6%. Increased minor error rates were observed with disk diffusion (12%), Alamar (16%), Uniscept (16%), and conventional (overnight) MicroScan panels (16%). The errors were primarily with Enterococcus casseliflavus strains and organisms containing the vanB vancomycin resistance gene. Very major error rates of 10.3 and 20.7% were observed with Vitek and MicroScan Rapid (MS/Rapid) systems, respectively; however, only the MS/Rapid system produced major errors (13.3%). On repeat testing of discrepant isolates, the very major error rate with the Vitek system dropped to 3.4%, while the very major error rate with the MS/Rapid system increased to 27.6%; major errors with the MS/Rapid system were not resolved. Many of the commercial systems had only 4 dilutions of vancomycin, which resulted in up to 84% of values being off scale (e.g., Uniscept). Of the methods tested, most conventional broth-and agar-based methods proved to be highly accurate when incubation was done for a full 24 h, although several of the tests had high minor error rates. Automated systems continued to demonstrate problems in detecting low-level resistance.

A challenge panel of enterococci (n ‫؍‬ 50) and staphylococci (n ‫؍‬ 50), including 17 and 15 isolates that were nonsusceptible to linezolid, respectively, were tested with the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute broth microdilution and disk diffusion reference methods. In addition, all 100 isolates were tested in parallel by Etest (AB Biodisk, Solna, Sweden), MicroScan WalkAway (Dade, West Sacramento, CA), BD Phoenix (BD Diagnostic Systems, Sparks, MD), VITEK (bioMérieux, Durham, NC), and VITEK 2 (bioMérieux) by using the manufacturers' protocols. Compared to the results of the broth microdilution method for detecting linezolidnonsusceptible staphylococci and enterococci, MicroScan results showed the highest category agreement (96.0%). The overall categorical agreement levels for VITEK 2, Etest, Phoenix, disk diffusion, and VITEK were 93.0%, 90.0%, 89.6%, 88.0%, and 85.9%, respectively. The essential agreement levels (results within ؎1 doubling dilution of the MIC determined by the reference method) for MicroScan, Phoenix, VITEK 2, Etest, and VITEK were 99.0%, 95.8%, 92.0%, 92.0%, and 85.9%, respectively. The very major error rates for staphylococci were the highest for VITEK (35.7%), Etest (40.0%), and disk diffusion (53.3%), although the total number of resistant isolates tested was small. The very major error rate for enterococci with VITEK was 20.0%. Three systems (MicroScan, VITEK, and VITEK 2) provided no interpretations of nonsusceptible results for staphylococci. These data, from a challenge panel of isolates, illustrate that the recent emergence of linezolidnonsusceptible staphylococci and enterococci is providing a challenge for many susceptibility testing systems.