Skip Navigation


JAC Advance Access originally published online on April 17, 2007
Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 2007 59(6):1109-1113; doi:10.1093/jac/dkm098
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
59/6/1109    most recent
dkm098v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Tazi, A.
Right arrow Articles by Poyart, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Tazi, A.
Right arrow Articles by Poyart, C.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Comparative evaluation of VITEK 2® for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of group B Streptococcus

Asmaa Tazi1,2,3, Hélène Réglier-Poupet1,2,3, Josette Raymond1,2, Jean-Marie Adam1, Patrick Trieu-Cuot2,4 and Claire Poyart1,2,3,4,*

1 Groupe Hospitalier Cochin-Saint Vincent de Paul, Service de Bactériologie, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, 27 rue du Faubourg Saint Jacques, 75679 Paris, France 2 French National Reference Centre for Streptococci, Groupe Hospitalier Cochin-Saint Vincent de Paul, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, 27 rue du Faubourg Saint Jacques, 75679 Paris, France 3 Institut Cochin Department of Infectious Diseases-INSERM U567-UMR CNRS 810, Faculté de Médecine Descartes, Université Paris Descartes, 24 rue du Faubourg Saint Jacques, 75014 Paris, France 4 Unité de Biologie des Bactéries Pathogènes à Gram-positif, URA CNRS 2172, Institut Pasteur, 75724 Paris, France

Received 28 January 2007; returned 1 March 2007; revised 10 March 2007; accepted 12 March 2007


* Correspondence address. Service de Bactériologie, Centre National de Référence des Streptocoques, Institut Cochin, INSERM567, Faculté de Médecine Descartes, 27 rue du Faubourg Saint Jacques, 75014 Paris, France. Tel: +33-1-58-41-15-60; Fax: +33-1-58-41-15-48; E-mail: claire.poyart{at}cch.aphp.fr

Objectives: Intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis is recommended to prevent neonatal group B streptococcal (GBS) disease in colonized women, and penicillin or aminopenicillin constitute the first-line antibiotics. Most isolates are resistant to tetracycline, and resistance to macrolide–lincosamide–streptogramin (MLS) antibiotics is increasing. Therefore, laboratory testing for MLS resistance in GBS is now recommended for penicillin-allergic patients. The aim of this study was to compare the antimicrobial susceptibility of GBS as determined by the VITEK 2 system (bioMérieux, Marcy l'Étoile, France), agar diffusion methods and PCR-genotypic detection of resistance genes.

Methods: One hundred and ten unrelated selected GBS clinical isolates were studied. The antibiotics tested (VITEK 2 and agar diffusion method) were benzylpenicillin, ampicillin, erythromycin, clindamycin, co-trimoxazole, tetracycline, kanamycin, streptomycin and vancomycin. A standardized double-disc (DD) diffusion test was performed for MLS antibiotics. Genotypic characterization of tetracycline, MLS and aminoglycoside resistance genes was performed by PCR.

Results: All strains were susceptible to benzylpenicillin, ampicillin and vancomycin [category agreement (CA) between VITEK 2 and the diffusion method was 100%]. Ninety-five (86%) strains were resistant to tetracycline (CA was 98.9%). Eighty-one strains (73.6%) harboured an MLS resistance phenotype; 50 (61.8%) an MLSB-constitutive phenotype, 25 (30.8%) an MLSB-inducible phenotype and 6 (7.4%) an M phenotype. The agreement between data of VITEK 2 and the DD diffusion test for the detection of MLSB-constitutive, MLSB-inducible and M phenotype isolates was 76%, 36% and 100%, respectively. Almost all discrepancies were due to failure to detect erythromycin resistance by VITEK 2.

Conclusions: VITEK 2 allows accurate determination of GBS susceptibility for the majority of antibiotics, but has to be improved for erythromycin. Thus, the DD diffusion test remains the most simple and reliable method for macrolide resistance detection among this streptococcal species.

Keywords: Streptococcus agalactiae , antibiotics , macrolides–lincosamides–streptogramins , PCR


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J Antimicrob ChemotherHome page
Y. W. Chu, C. Tse, G. K.-L. Tsang, D. K.-S. So, J. T.-L. Fung, and J. Y.-C. Lo
Invasive group B Streptococcus isolates showing reduced susceptibility to penicillin in Hong Kong
J. Antimicrob. Chemother., December 1, 2007; 60(6): 1407 - 1409.
[Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.