Elution methods to evaluate colistin susceptibility of Gram-negative rods

Dalmolin, Tanise Vendruscolo; Mazzetti, Alana; Ávila, Helena; Kranich, Julia; Carneiro, Gabriel Ibrahim Borba; Arend, Lavinia Nery Villa Stangler; Becker, Guilherme Nardi; Ferreira, Karin Obladen; Lima-Morales, Daiana de; Barth, Afonso Luís; Pillonetto, Marcelo

doi:10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2019.114910

Cited by 19 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Three studies have evaluated the modified version of the CBDE 57-59 . Bell et al (2019) was the first to describe a modified CBDE method.…”

Section: Phenotypic Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Dalmolin et al (2019) evaluated the CBDE method using final volumes of 1mL and 200µL in colistin broth microelution (CBM) and the microelution test (MPT), respectively. The two methods were evaluated on 68 Enterobacterales , nine A. baumannii and eight P. aeruginosa isolates from human and animal samples 57 . Both CBDE methods were performed as previously described, however the CBDE mixture was fractioned in 1mL tubes for the CMB test and 200µL in microtiter plates for MPT test 57 .…”

Section: Phenotypic Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The two methods were evaluated on 68 Enterobacterales , nine A. baumannii and eight P. aeruginosa isolates from human and animal samples 57 . Both CBDE methods were performed as previously described, however the CBDE mixture was fractioned in 1mL tubes for the CMB test and 200µL in microtiter plates for MPT test 57 . Additionally, this study evaluated the colistin susceptibility test tube (CSTT), which was performed using one tube with 5mL CA-MHB and 10 µg colistin disk to yield a final concentration of 2 µg/mL 57 .…”

Section: Phenotypic Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both CBDE methods were performed as previously described, however the CBDE mixture was fractioned in 1mL tubes for the CMB test and 200µL in microtiter plates for MPT test 57 . Additionally, this study evaluated the colistin susceptibility test tube (CSTT), which was performed using one tube with 5mL CA-MHB and 10 µg colistin disk to yield a final concentration of 2 µg/mL 57 . All three methods presented unsatisfactory MEs and VMEs; particularly, they performed poorly for non-fermenters 57 .…”

Section: Phenotypic Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Additionally, this study evaluated the colistin susceptibility test tube (CSTT), which was performed using one tube with 5mL CA-MHB and 10 µg colistin disk to yield a final concentration of 2 µg/mL 57 . All three methods presented unsatisfactory MEs and VMEs; particularly, they performed poorly for non-fermenters 57 .…”

Section: Phenotypic Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Current and emerging polymyxin resistance diagnostics: a systematic review of established and novel detection methods

Leshaba¹,

Mbelle²,

Sekyere³

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. The escalation of colistin resistance, due to transferable mcr-genes, threatens public and animal health as there are limited therapeutic options. Given that colistin is a last-line antibiotic, there is a need to contain the spread of its resistance to conserve its efficacy. Herein, current and emerging colistin resistance diagnostics are described to inform faster clinical diagnostic choices. Methods. A literature search in Pubmed, between 2016 and 2020, was performed. English articles evaluating colistin resistance methods/diagnostics were included. Results. Screening resulted in the inclusion of 89 journal articles. Current colistin resistance diagnostics are either phenotypic or molecular. Broth microdilution (BMD) is currently the only golden standard for determining colistin MIC values. However, other methods have been developed to overcome the challenges associated with the BMD. Phenotypic methods comprise agar-based methods i.e. ChromAgar Col-APSE, SuperPolymyxin, ChromID Colistin R etc., MIC-determiners i.e. Microscan, BD Phoenix, Sensitest colistin, Sensititre, Micronaut etc., MCR-detectors i.e. lateral flow immunoassay (LFI), chelator based assays i.e. EDTA- and DPA-based tests as well as biochemical colorimetric tests i.e. Rapid Polymyxin NP test, Rapid ResaPolymyxin NP test etc. Molecular methods only characterize mobile colistin resistance; they include PCR, LAMP, whole-genome sequencing (WGS) etc. Conclusion. Considering the efficiency (sensitivity, specificity, turnaround time) of the Rapid ResaPolymyxin NP test, it is recommended for the initial screening of colistin-resistant isolates. This can be followed by chelator-based tests or the LFI for the rapid screening of mcr-genes. However molecular assays such as LAMP, PCR may be considered for use in well-equipped clinical laboratories.

show abstract

“…Three studies have evaluated the modified version of the CBDE 57-59 . Bell et al (2019) was the first to describe a modified CBDE method.…”

Section: Phenotypic Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Phenotypic Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%