■在这个比较案例研究中,我们讨论了头孢曲松抗菌药敏试验(AST)解释的临床相关差异,β-内酰胺酶阴性,从血液培养物中分离的氨苄西林抗性(BLNAR)流感嗜血杆菌。
一名74岁的男子患有3天的疾病,其特征是呼吸急促和干咳,入院时发热和缺氧。血培养瓶标记为革兰氏阴性球杆菌阳性,后来被确定为流感嗜血杆菌的患者开始使用头孢曲松。分离株为β-内酰胺酶阴性,使用圆盘扩散进行的抗生素敏感性测试(AST)显示,通过EUCAST方法,分离株对头孢曲松和氨苄西林具有抗性。患者随后改为阿莫西林/克拉维酸。并行使用CLSI方法的进一步AST证明了两种敏感性方法之间的差异结果。患者康复,无并发症。
■这种差异可能导致实验室之间的敏感性报告不一致,因此抗生素处方,特别是对于侵入性分离物。随着越来越多的实验室在澳大利亚和全球采用EUCAST方法进行AST解释,临床医生必须考虑这些方法学差异的临床意义.
UNASSIGNED: In this comparative case study, we discuss clinically relevant discrepancies of antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) interpretation for ceftriaxone against a non-typable, beta-lactamase negative, ampicillin-resistant (BLNAR) Haemophilus influenzae isolated from a blood culture.
UNASSIGNED: A 74-year-old man presented with a 3 day illness characterized by shortness of breath and dry cough, and was noted to be febrile and hypoxic on admission. A blood culture bottle flagged positive with Gram-negative coccobacilli, later identified as Haemophilus influenzae with the patient commenced on ceftriaxone. The isolate was beta-lactamase negative and antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST) using disc diffusion revealed the isolate resistant to ceftriaxone and ampicillin by EUCAST methodology, with the patient subsequently changed to amoxicillin/clavulanate. Further AST using the CLSI methodology in parallel demonstrated discrepant results between the two susceptibility methods. The patient recovered without complications.
UNASSIGNED: This discrepancy could lead to inconsistent reporting of susceptibilities between laboratories, and consequently antibiotic prescribing, especially for invasive isolates. As more laboratories adopt EUCAST methodologies for AST interpretation in Australia and globally, it is important for clinicians to consider the clinical implications of these methodological discrepancies.