LAUSR.org creates dashboard-style pages of related content for over 1.5 million academic articles. Sign Up to like articles & get recommendations!

Multicenter Clinical Evaluation of Vitek 2 Meropenem-Vaborbactam for Susceptibility Testing of Enterobacterales and Pseudomonas aeruginosa

Photo by mykjohnson from unsplash

The carbapenem/beta-lactamase inhibitor meropenem-vaborbactam (MEV) used to treat complicated urinary tract infections and pyelonephritis in adults was approved in 2017 by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Here, we… Click to show full abstract

The carbapenem/beta-lactamase inhibitor meropenem-vaborbactam (MEV) used to treat complicated urinary tract infections and pyelonephritis in adults was approved in 2017 by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Here, we evaluated Vitek 2 MEV (bioMérieux, Durham, NC) compared to the reference broth microdilution (BMD) method. ABSTRACT The carbapenem/beta-lactamase inhibitor meropenem-vaborbactam (MEV) used to treat complicated urinary tract infections and pyelonephritis in adults was approved in 2017 by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Here, we evaluated Vitek 2 MEV (bioMérieux, Durham, NC) compared to the reference broth microdilution (BMD) method. Of 449 Enterobacterales isolates analyzed per FDA/CLSI breakpoints, the overall performance was 98.2% essential agreement (EA), 98.7% category agreement (CA), and 0% very major errors (VME) or major errors (ME). For 438 FDA intended-for-use Enterobacterales isolates, performance was 98.2% EA, 98.6% CA, and 0% VME or ME. Evaluable EA was 81.0%, but with only 42 on-scale evaluable results. Individual species demonstrated EA and CA rates of ≥90% without any VME or ME. When evaluated using European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) breakpoints, overall Vitek 2 MEV performance for Enterobacterales and Pseudomonas aeruginosa demonstrated 97.3% EA, 99.2% CA, 2.3% VME, and 0.6% ME (after error resolution: 97.3% EA, 99.4% CA, 2.2% VME, and 0.4% ME) compared to the reference BMD method. Performance for P. aeruginosa included 92.2% EA, 97.4% CA, 0% VME, and 3.0% ME (after error resolution: 92.2% EA, 98.7% CA, 0% VME, and 1.5% ME). Performance for Enterobacterales included 98.2% EA, 99.6% CA, 3.0% VME, and 0.2% ME. Evaluable EA was 80.6% but was based on only 67 evaluable results. These findings support Vitek 2 MEV as an accurate automated system for MEV susceptibility testing of Enterobacterales and P. aeruginosa and could be an alternate solution to the manual-labor-intensive reference BMD method.

Keywords: vme; susceptibility testing; mev; meropenem vaborbactam

Journal Title: Journal of Clinical Microbiology
Year Published: 2021

Link to full text (if available)


Share on Social Media:                               Sign Up to like & get
recommendations!

Related content

More Information              News              Social Media              Video              Recommended



                Click one of the above tabs to view related content.