EUCAST rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing of blood cultures positive for Escherichia coli or Klebsiella pneumoniae: experience of three laboratories in Italy

Analytical Performance and Potential Clinical Utility of EUCAST Rapid Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing in Blood Cultures after Four Hours of Incubation

“…In contrast to the results of Berinson et al, our results suggest that EUCAST RAST is efficient and reliable for detection of cefotaxime resistance. This finding is in line with a previous study in our laboratory on the short-term incubation of EUCAST disk diffusion, ROSCO ESBL, and carbapenemase detection kits in which we reported high performance for detection of cefotaxime resistance ( 20 ) and with a study by Cortazzo et al, who reported a CA of 100% for cefotaxime and E. coli and K. pneumoniae strains after 4, 6, and 8 h of incubation, including detection of all 48 ESBL-producing isolates ( 11 ).…”

“…In the present study, the highest ATU rates were due to piperacillin-tazobactam and ciprofloxacin, which is similar to previous studies ( 11 – 15 , 18 , 19 ). Nevertheless, the CA of EUCAST RAST with the standard DD method was well over 90% for all tested antibiotics.…”

“…A previous study including 19 meropenem-resistant E. coli isolates and 47 meropenem-resistant K. pneumoniae isolates reported a CA of 90.2% and 97.2%, respectively, after 6 h of incubation and 95.1% and 95.8% after 8 h of incubation, with 1.4% mE as the only occurring error ( 17 ). Another study reported RAST results for 27 meropenem-resistant E. coli and K. pneumoniae isolates after 4 h of incubation, for which the CA was 99.5% with 1 mE, and only 1% were in the ATU ( 11 ). Further verification studies of the EUCAST RAST in settings with high carbapenem resistance could be of interest to further scrutinize the meropenem breakpoints.…”

“…It is important to evaluate the effect of implementation of rapid methods in the clinical routine. However, hitherto published studies have provided limited information about the performance in relation to effectiveness and clinical usefulness, although showing reliable AST results with EUCAST RAST ( 11 – 17 ), including earlier initiation of optimal antibiotic therapy ( 12 , 14 ). We aimed to evaluate the performance of EUCAST RAST for E. coli and K. pneumoniae isolates (i.e., K. pneumoniae complex, including K. pneumoniae and Klebsiella variicola isolates) compared to the standard DD method and the possible clinical impact of rapid susceptibility reports.…”

Impact and Diversity of ESBL-Producing Klebsiella pneumoniae Recovered from Raw Chicken Meat Samples in Türkiye

“…All isolates were tested for ampicillin, azithromycin, cefepime, ciprofloxacin, colistin, ertapenem, cefoxitin, gentamicin, imipenem, meropenem, nalidixic acid, cefotaxime, ceftazidime, temocillin, tetracycline, tigecycline, trimethoprim, chloramphenicol, sulfamethoxazole, cefotaxime/clavulanic acid and ceftazidime/clavulanic acid susceptibility. AST was conducted according to the recommendation of EUCAST, and the breakpoints suggested for the clinical cut-off values [52] were used for the interpretation of the results.…”