These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Evaluation of the VITEK 2 system for the identification and susceptibility testing of three species of nonfermenting gram-negative rods frequently isolated from clinical samples.
    Author: Joyanes P, del Carmen Conejo M, Martínez-Martínez L, Perea EJ.
    Journal: J Clin Microbiol; 2001 Sep; 39(9):3247-53. PubMed ID: 11526158.
    Abstract:
    VITEK 2 is a new automatic system for the identification and susceptibility testing of the most clinically important bacteria. In the present study 198 clinical isolates, including Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n = 146), Acinetobacter baumannii (n = 25), and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia (n = 27) were evaluated. Reference susceptibility testing of cefepime, cefotaxime, ceftazidime, ciprofloxacin, gentamicin, imipenem, meropenem, piperacillin, tobramycin, levofloxacin (only for P. aeruginosa), co-trimoxazole (only for S. maltophilia), and ampicillin-sulbactam and tetracycline (only for A. baumannii) was performed by microdilution (NCCLS guidelines). The VITEK 2 system correctly identified 91.6, 100, and 76% of P. aeruginosa, S. maltophilia, and A. baumannii isolates, respectively, within 3 h. The respective percentages of essential agreement (to within 1 twofold dilution) for P. aeruginosa and A. baumannii were 89.0 and 88.0% (cefepime), 91.1 and 100% (cefotaxime), 95.2 and 96.0% (ceftazidime), 98.6 and 100% (ciprofloxacin), 88.4 and 100% (gentamicin), 87.0 and 92.0% (imipenem), 85.0 and 88.0% (meropenem), 84.2 and 96.0% (piperacillin), and 97.3 and 80% (tobramycin). The essential agreement for levofloxacin against P. aeruginosa was 86.3%. The percentages of essential agreement for ampicillin-sulbactam and tetracycline against A. baumannii were 88.0 and 100%, respectively. Very major errors for P. aeruginosa (resistant by the reference method, susceptible with the VITEK 2 system [resistant to susceptible]) were noted for cefepime (0.7%), cefotaxime (0.7%), gentamicin (0.7%), imipenem (1.4%), levofloxacin (2.7%), and piperacillin (2.7%) and, for one strain of A. baumannii, for imipenem. Major errors (susceptible to resistant) were noted only for P. aeruginosa and cefepime (2.0%), ceftazidime (0.7%), and piperacillin (3.4%). Minor errors ranged from 0.0% for piperacillin to 22.6% for cefotaxime against P. aeruginosa and from 0.0% for piperacillin and ciprofloxacin to 20.0% for cefepime against A. baumannii. The VITEK 2 system provided co-trimoxazole MICs only for S. maltophilia; no very major or major errors were obtained for co-trimoxazole against this species. It is concluded that the VITEK 2 system allows the rapid identification of S. maltophilia and most P. aeruginosa and A. baumannii isolates. The VITEK 2 system can perform reliable susceptibility testing of many of the antimicrobial agents used against P. aeruginosa and A. baumannii. It would be desirable if new versions of the VITEK 2 software were able to determine MICs and the corresponding clinical categories of agents active against S. maltophilia.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]