COLISTIN SUSCEPTIBILITY TESTING OF CARBAPENEM RESISTANT ENTEROBACTERIACEAE-A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF BROTH MICRODILUTION METHOD AND VITEK 2 METHOD

S. JOSHY¹, R. JOSE²*
¹Department of Microbiology, Jubilee Mission Medical College Hospital and Research Institute, Thrissur, 680005, Kerala, India
²Department of Microbiology, Jubilee Mission Medical College Hospital and Research Institute, Thrissur, 680005, Kerala, India
* Corresponding Author : rosdinmi@gmail.com

Received : 01-05-2022     Accepted : 26-05-2022     Published : 30-05-2022
Volume : 14     Issue : 1       Pages : 1982 - 1984
Int J Microbiol Res 14.1 (2022):1982-1984

Keywords : Carbapenem resistant Enterobacteriaceae, Colistin susceptibility testing, Broth microdilution method, Vitek 2 method
Academic Editor : Dr Dibyajyoti Talukdar, Leena Kamalaskar, Anand B Janagond, Natteewan Udomsil, Mathavi S., Kumar D Shiva, Dr Carlos Aa Chagas, Kalpana Rana, Lalit Batra, Lilian Carla Carneiro
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : Authors are thankful to Department of Microbiology, Jubilee Mission Medical College Hospital and Research Institute, Thrissur, 680005, Kerala, India
Author Contribution : All authors equally contributed

Comparative study conducted in the Department of Microbiology in a tertiary care teaching hospital during December 2019 to May 2021. Minimum inhibitory concentration of colistin determined by broth microdilution method for clinical isolates of Carbapenem resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE)and compared with the results obtained in Vitek 2 Compact. A total of 205 CRE isolates were included in the study. Klebsiella pneumoniae (60.5%) was the predominant CRE isolate, followed by E. coli (36.6%) and Enterobacter cloacae (2.9%). MIC ranging from 0. 0625 µg/ml to 0.5 µg/ml were obtained for our study isolates. All the 205 Carbapenem resistant Enterobacteriaceae isolates in the study were found to be susceptible to colistin both by BMD method and VITEK 2 method. There was 100% categorical agreement between microbroth dilution method and VITEK 2 system for colistin susceptibility. Our study results showed that automated method, VITEK 2 compact system can be used as reliable alternative method for reporting colistin susceptibility

1. World Health Organization. Antimicrobial Resistance, Global Report on Surveillance. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2014.
2. Falagas M.E., Lourida P., Poulikakos P., Rafailidis P.I., Tansarli G.S. (2014) Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 58(2), 654-63.
3. The Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing; 28th ed. CLSI document M100. Wayne, PA, The Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 2018.
4. The Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Methods for Dilution Antimicrobial Susceptibility Tests for Bacteria that Grow Aerobically, Approved Standard. 10th ed. CLSI document M07 A10. Wayne, PA, The Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 2016.
5. ISO 20776-1, 2006- Clinical laboratory testing and in vitro diagnostic test systems- Susceptibility testing of infectious agents and evaluation of performance of antimicrobial susceptibility test devices- Part 1, Reference method for testing the in vitro activity of antimicrobial agents against rapidly growing aerobic bacteria involved in infectious diseases.
6. The European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. Routine and extended internal quality control for MIC determination and disk diffusion as recommended by EUCAST. Version 8.0, 2018.
7. The Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Verification of commercial Microbial Identification and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing Systems. 1st ed. CLSI Document M52 Ed1.Wayne, PA, The Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 2017.
8. Ghafur A., Lakshmi V., Kannain P., Murali A., Thirunarayan M.A. (2014) Journal of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, 1, 4(03), 86-91.
9. Goel G., Hmar L., De M.S., Bhattacharya S., Chandy M. (2014) Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology, 35(8), 1076-7.
10. Datta P., Gupta V., Garg S., Chander J. (2012) Indian Journal of Pathology and Microbiology, 55(3), 357.
11. Kar P., Behera B., Mohanty S., Jena J., Mahapatra A. (2021) Journal of Laboratory Physicians, 13(03), 263-9.
12. Gupta N., Limbago B.M., Patel J.B., Kallen A.J. (2011) Clinical infectious diseases, 53(1), 60-7.
13. Sharma A., Agrawal M. (2019) Galore International Journal of Health Sciences & Research, 4(4), 110-115.
14. Shaikh S., Pandya H., Arora S. & Kamtekar T. (2019) Int J Intern Med Geriatr, 1(2), 54-58.
15. Sarumathi D., Rajashekar D., Sastry A.S. (2020) Journal of Clinical & Diagnostic Research, 2(1), 14(7).
16. Bhaskar B.H., Mulki S.S., Joshi S., Adhikari R., Venkatesh B.M. (2017) Asian Journal of Pharmaceutical and Clinical Research, 10(9), 70-3.
17. Dafopoulou K., Zarkotou O., Dimitroulia E., Hadjichristodoulou C., Gennimata V., Pournaras S., Tsakris A. (2015) Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 59, 4625–4630.
18. Piewngam P., and Kiratisin P. (2014) Int. J.Antimicrob. Agents 44, 396-401.
19. Das S., Roy S., Roy S., Goelv G., Sinha S., Mathur P., et al. (2020) Indian J Med Microbiol., 38, 58-65.