Testing of staphylococci other than Staphylococcus aureus (SOSA) for mecA-mediated resistance is challenging. Isolates of Staphylococcus capitis, Staphylococcus haemolyticus, Staphylococcus hominis and Staphylococcus warneri were evaluated by cefoxitin and oxacillin broth microdilution (BMD) and disk diffusion (DD) and PBP2a immunoassay and compared to mecA PCR results. No phenotypic susceptibility test correlated well with PCR results across all species, although PBP2a immunoassay yielded 100% correlation. Oxacillin BMD testing by current Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) SOSA breakpoints led to 2.1% very major errors (VME) and 7.1% major errors (ME). Adjusting this breakpoint up by a dilution (susceptible, ≤0.5μg/mL; resistant, ≥1.0 μg/mL) led to 2.8% VME and 0.3% ME. Among species evaluated, S. haemolyticus had unacceptable VMEs with this new breakpoint (6.4%), as did S. hominis (4.0%). MEs were acceptable by this new breakpoint, ranging from 0-1.2%. Oxacillin DD yielded high ME rates (20.7-21.7%) using CLSI or European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing breakpoints. VMEs ranged from 0% - 5.3%. Cefoxitin BMD led to 4.9% VMEs and 1.6% MEs. Cefoxitin DD performed best when interpreted with CLSI SOSA breakpoint with 1.0% VMEs and 2.9% MEs. This study led CLSI to adjust the oxacillin MIC breakpoints for SOSA. Laboratories should be aware that no individual phenotypic test correlates well across all species of SOSA with mecA PCR results. Molecular testing for mecA or evaluation for PBP2a is the preferred approach.

The performance characteristics of the ceftolozane-tazobactam (C-T) Etest (bioMérieux, Marcy l'Etoile, France), MIC test strips (MTS; Liofilchem, Italy), and disk diffusion (Hardy, Santa Ana, CA) were evaluated for a collection of 308 beta-lactam-resistant isolates of recovered from three institutions in Los Angeles, CA. Reference testing was performed by the reference broth microdilution (rBMD) method. MIC and disk results were interpreted using Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute breakpoints. Overall, 72.5% of the isolates were susceptible to C-T by rBMD. Etest and disk diffusion demonstrated acceptable performance, whereas MTS yielded a greater than acceptable percentage of minor errors. Categorical agreement was 96.8% for Etest, 87.0% for MTS, and 92.9% for disk diffusion. No very major errors were observed by any test, and no major errors (ME) were observed by Etest or disk diffusion. Two ME (0.9% of susceptible isolates) were observed by MTS. The incidence of minor errors was 3.2%, 12.3%, and 7.1% for Etest, MTS, and disk diffusion, respectively. Essential agreement (EA) for Etest was excellent, at 97.7%, whereas the MICs obtained by MTS tended to be 1 to 2 dilutions higher than those obtained by rBMD, with an EA of 87.0%.

No abstract