Performance of Rapid Polymyxin™ NP and Rapid Polymyxin™ Acinetobacter for the detection of polymyxin resistance in carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii and Enterobacterales

• Published in: Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy 2020-06, Vol.75 (6), p.1484-1490
• Main Authors: Kon, Hadas, Abramov, Shirin, Amar Ben Dalak, Maayan, Elmaliach, Noy, Schwartz, David, Carmeli, Yehuda, Lellouche, Jonathan
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• ISSN: 0305-7453; 1460-2091
• DOI: 10.1093/jac/dkaa050

The global spread of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) and Acinetobacter baumannii (CRAB) has prompted the reintroduction of colistin as a last-resort treatment. Although the recommended method for colistin susceptibility testing is broth microdilution (BMD), methods that are more rapid and easy to use are needed. To evaluate the performance of two commercial kits for colistin susceptibility testing: Rapid Polymyxin™ NP (RP-NP) for CRE and Rapid Polymyxin™ Acinetobacter (RP-AB) for CRAB. A total of 76 CRE and 87 CRAB isolates were collected from hospitalized patients in Europe and Israel. The isolates were subcultured twice on 5% sheep blood in tryptic soy agar. We tested colistin susceptibility using the RP-NP and RP-AB kits and compared the results with those from BMD. Of the CRE isolates, 25% (19/76) were resistant to colistin using BMD. Categorical agreement between RP-NP and BMD was 93.4% (71/76), major errors 1.8% (1/57) and very major errors 21.1% (4/19). Sensitivity was 78.9% and specificity was 98.2%. Of the CRAB isolates, 58.6% (51/87) were resistant to colistin by BMD. Categorical agreement between RP-AB and BMD was 59.8% (52/87), major errors 13.9% (5/36) and very major errors 58.8% (30/51). Sensitivity of RP-AB was 41.2% and specificity was 86.1%. In many of the tested isolates, weak or inconclusive colour changes in the test wells caused difficulty in interpretation, resulting in an unacceptable rate of very major errors.