Cent Eur J Public Health 2010, 18(2):119-123 | DOI: 10.21101/cejph.a3571

Discrepancies between Various Methods in Susceptibility Testing and Epidemiological Analysis of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia Clinical Isolates

Aikaterini Masgala, Irene Galani, Maria Souli, Helen Giamarellou
4th Department of Internal Medicine, Molecular Biology Section, University of Athens Medical School, Athens, Greece

The susceptibility of 25 Stenotrophomonas maltophilia (S. maltophilia) clinical isolates to four different antimicrobials (trimethoprim/sulfomethoxazole, piperacillin/tazobactam, ceftazidime, ciprofloxacin) were investigated by disk diffusion, E-test and commercial Sensititre and PASCO broth microdilution techniques. Discrepancies between the results of broth microdilution and the other methods studied were characterized as very major, major and minor errors. Using the broth microdilution as the reference method, 24% of the isolates were found susceptible to trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole, 20% to ceftazidime, 0% to piperacillin/tazobactam and 12% to ciprofloxacin. Good correlation was observed between the two broth microdilution Sensititre and PASCO for all antibiotics tested. Disc diffusion and E-test generated inconsistent results for all agents except trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole. A great genomic diversity was demonstrated within the S. maltophilia strains tested. Although our results confirm that trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole had some in vitro activity against S. maltophilia, further clinical studies are necessary to evaluate the clinical efficacy of these compounds for the treatment of S. maltophilia infections, since no randomized controlled trials have been carried out and no correlation between the clinical response and susceptibility testing results has been reported. Furthermore, the high genomic diversity observed in the S. maltophilia strains indicates the need for careful epidemiological evaluation especially in nosocomial outbreaks.

Keywords: E-test, disk diffusion, broth microdilution, epidemiological analysis

Received: June 4, 2009; Revised: September 25, 2009; Accepted: September 25, 2009; Published: June 1, 2010  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Masgala A, Galani I, Souli M, Giamarellou H. Discrepancies between Various Methods in Susceptibility Testing and Epidemiological Analysis of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia Clinical Isolates. Cent Eur J Public Health. 2010;18(2):119-123. doi: 10.21101/cejph.a3571. PubMed PMID: 20939265.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. VanCouwenberghe CJ, Farver TB, Cohen SH. Risk factors associated with isolation of Stenotrophomonas (Xanthomonas) maltophilia in clinical specimens. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1997 May;18(5):31621. Go to original source...
    2. Friedman ND, Korman TM, Fairley CK, Franklin JC, Spelman DW. Bacteraemia due to Stenotrophomonas maltophilia; an analysis of 45 episodes. J Infect. 2002 Jul;45(1):47-53. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    3. Arpi M, Victor MA, Mortensen I, GottschauA, Bruun B. In vitro susceptibility of 124 Xanthomonas maltophilia (Stenotrophomonas maltophilia) isolates: comparison of the agar dilution method with the E-test and two agar diffusion methods. APMIS. 1996 Jan;104(2):108-14. Go to original source...
    4. Hohl P, Frei R,Aubry P. In vitro susceptibility of 33 clinical case isolates of Xanthomonas maltophilia. Inconsistent correlation of agar dilution and of disk diffusion test results. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 1991 SepOct;14(5):447-50. Go to original source...
    5. Traub WH, Leonhard B, Bauer D. Antibiotic susceptibility of Stenotrophomonas (Xanthomonas) maltophilia: comparative (NCCLS criteria) evaluation of antimicrobial drugs with the agar dilution and the agar disk diffusion (Bauer-Kirby) tests. Chemotherapy. 1998 May-Jun;44(3):16473. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    6. Yao JD, Louie M, Louie L, Goodfellow J, Simor AE. Comparison of E-test and agar dilution for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Stenotrophomonas (Xanthomonas maltophilia. J Clin Microbiol. 1995 May;33(5):1428-30. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    7. Dembry LM, Farrel PA, Orcutt DR, Gerrity LA, Andriole VT. In vitro activity of trovafloxacin against sensitive and resistant aerobic bacteria using the standard microdilution broth method and Etest. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1997 Jun;39 Suppl B:35-42. Go to original source...
    8. MacKenzie FM, Smith SV, Milne KE, Griffiths K, Legge J, Gould IM. Antibiograms of resistant Gram-negative bacteria from Scottish CF patients. J Cyst Fibros. 2004 Aug;3(3):151-7. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    9. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing. Eighteenth Informational Supplement M100-S18. Wayne: CLSI; 2008.
    10. Berg G, Roskot N, Smalla K. Genotypic and phenotypic relationships between clinical and environmental isolates of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia. J Clin Microbiol. 1999 Nov;37(11):3594-600. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    11. Tenover FC,Arbeit RD, Goering RV, Mickelsen PA, Murray BE, Persing DH, et al. Interpreting chromosomal DNA restriction patterns produced by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis: criteria for bacterial strain typing. J Clin Microbiol. 1995 Sep;33(9):2233-9. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    12. Jones RN, Sader HS, Beach ML. Contemporary in vitro spectrum of activity summary for antimicrobial agents tested against 18569 strains non-fermentative Gram-negative bacilli isolated in the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program (1997-2001). Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2003 Dec;22(6):551-6 Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    13. Liaw SJ, Teng LJ, Hsueh PR, Ho SW, Luh KT. In vitro activities of antimicrobial combinations against clinical isolates of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia. J Formos Med Assoc. 2002 Jul;101(7):495-501. Go to PubMed...
    14. Hoban DJ, Bouchillon SK, Johnson JL, Zhanel GG, Butler DL, Miller LA, et al; Gemifloxacin Surveillance Study Research Group. Comparative in vitro potency of gemifloxacin and fluoroquinolones against recent European clinical isolates from a global surveillance study. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2001 Nov;20(11):814-9. Go to original source...
    15. Di Bonaventura G, D'Antonio D, Catamo G, D'Ercole S, Piccolomini R. Comparative in vitro activity of levofloxacin and ciprofloxacin against bacterial isolates from neutropenic patients. Chemotherapy. 2002 Jul;48(3):134-7. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    16. RiberaA, JuradoA, Ruiz J, Marco F, Del Valle O, Mensa J, et al. In vitro activity of clinafloxacin in comparison with other quinolones against Stenotrophomonas maltophilia clinical isolates in the presence and absence of reserpine. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2002 Feb;42(2):1238. Go to original source...
    17. Hanberger H, Nilsson LE; Swedish Study Group. High frequency of antibiotic resistance among Gram-negative isolates in ICUs at 10 Swedish hospitals. Clin Microbiol Infect. 1997 Apr;3(2):208-15. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    18. Hejnar P, Hamal P, Koukalová D. Influence of an extended incubation period on values of MIC of antibiotics in Stenotrophomonas maltophilia clinical strains. New Microbiol. 2000 Oct;23(4):415-21. Go to PubMed...
    19. Tatman-Otkun M, Gürcan S, Ozer B, Aydoslu B, Bukavaz S. The antimicrobial susceptibility of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia isolates using three different methods and their genetic relatedness. BMC Microbiol. 2005 May 9;5:24. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    20. Gülmez D, Hasçelik G. Stenotrophomonas maltophilia: antimicrobial resistance and molecular typing of an emerging pathogen in a Turkish university hospital. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2005 Nov;11(11):880-6. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    21. Pankuch GA, Jacobs MR, Rittenhouse SF, Appelbaum PC. Susceptibilities of 123 strains of Xanthomonas maltophilia to eight beta-lactams (including beta-lactam-beta-lactamase inhibitor combinations) and ciprofloxacin tested by five methods. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1994 Oct;38(10):2317-22. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    22. Carroll KC, Cohen S, Nelson R, Campbell DM, Claridge JD, Garrison MW, et al. Comparison of various in vitro susceptibility methods for testing Stenotrophomonas maltophilia. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 1998 Nov;32(3):229-35. Go to original source...
    23. Krueger TS, Clark EA, Nix DE. In vitro susceptibility of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia to various antimicrobial combinations. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2001 Sep-Oct;41(1-2):71-8. Go to original source...
    24. San Gabriel P, Zhou J, Tabibi S, ChenY, Trauzzi M, Saiman L.Antimicrobial susceptibility and synergy studies of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia isolates from patients with cystic fibrosis.AntimicrobAgents Chemother. 2004 Jan;48(1):168-71. Go to original source...
    25. Valdezate S, Vindel A, Martín-Dávila P, Del Saz BS, Baquero F, Cantón R. High genetic diversity among Stenotrophomonas maltophilia strains despite their originating at a single hospital. J Clin Microbiol. 2004 Feb;42(2):693-9. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    26. Karelová E, Křížová P, Musílek M. MLEE and PFGE characterization of Neisseria meningitis serogroup C and B isolated in the Slovak Republic in 1998. Cent Eur J Public Health. 2002 Jun;10(1-2):60-5.
    27. Poulos CD, Matsumura SO, Willey BM, Low DE, McGeer A. In vitro activities of antimicrobial combinations against Stenotrophomonas (Xanthomonas) maltophilia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1995 Oct;39(10):2220-3. Go to original source...
    28. Vartivarian S, Anaissie E, Bodey G, Sprigg H, Rolston K. A changing pattern of susceptibility of Xanthomonas maltophilia to antimicrobial agents: implications for therapy. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1994 Mar;38(3):624-7. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...

    Return to the content