Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 29, 2026

A 1.5 Hour Procedure for Identification of Enterococcus Species Directly from Blood Cultures
Published on: February 10, 2011
Difficulties in detection and identification of Enterococcus faecium with low-level inducible resistance to
1Centre for Infectious Diseases and Microbiology, Institute of Clinical Pathology and Medical Research, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia. stella.pendle@symbionhealth.com
Abstract:
Between June and November 2004, a vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium (VRE) strain was isolated from 13 patients in the haematology/bone marrow transplant unit. There were difficulties in identifying the organism, which had low-level, inducible vancomycin resistance, and standard screening methods did not reveal carriage in patients or their contacts. These technical failures led to spread of VRE and delays in providing appropriate management, which might otherwise have been avoided. Therefore, we reviewed our laboratory methods and compared three identification systems to determine which would best identify this VRE strain. The VITEK 2 (BioMerieux) correctly identified, as E. faecium, only two of 16 isolates, whereas API Rapid ID 32 Strep (BioMerieux) and Phoenix 100 (Becton Dickinson and Co.) correctly identified 13 of 15 and 12 of 13 isolates tested, respectively. Isolates from urine, tested by the CLSI disk diffusion method, were apparently susceptible or of intermediate susceptibility to vancomycin, upon primary testing. VITEK 2 and Phoenix 100 identified all isolates as vancomycin-resistant, although the MICs, measured by Etest, were in the susceptible range for three of 16 isolates. Reducing the vancomycin concentration in screening media substantially increased the sensitivity for detection of VRE. Isolates were characterized as genotype vanB2/3 by PCR and were indistinguishable from each other by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis. VRE with low-level inducible resistance can be missed by routine screening methods. Better identification and screening methods for detection of low-level vancomycin resistance are needed to improve surveillance and prevent transmission of VRE.
Insights
Routine screening methods failed to detect a vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium (VRE) strain with inducible resistance. Improved laboratory identification and surveillance are crucial to prevent VRE transmission in healthcare settings.
Area of Science:
- Microbiology
- Infectious Diseases
- Clinical Laboratory Science
Background:
- Vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium (VRE) poses a significant challenge in healthcare settings.
- Low-level, inducible vancomycin resistance in VRE can evade standard detection methods.
- Difficulties in identifying VRE led to its undetected spread and delayed patient management.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate and compare the performance of different laboratory identification systems for a challenging VRE strain.
- To assess the effectiveness of standard screening methods in detecting VRE with inducible resistance.
- To identify improved methods for VRE detection and surveillance.
Main Methods:
- Comparison of three automated identification systems: VITEK 2, API Rapid ID 32 Strep, and Phoenix 100.
- Evaluation of CLSI disk diffusion and Etest for vancomycin susceptibility testing.
- Optimization of VRE screening media by reducing vancomycin concentration.
- Molecular characterization using PCR for vanB genotype and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis for strain typing.
Main Results:
- VITEK 2 showed poor identification accuracy for the VRE strain.
- API Rapid ID 32 Strep and Phoenix 100 demonstrated better identification capabilities.
- Initial susceptibility testing by disk diffusion suggested vancomycin susceptibility in some isolates.
- Reduced vancomycin concentration in screening media significantly improved VRE detection sensitivity.
- All isolates were confirmed as vanB2/3 genotype VRE and were indistinguishable by PFGE.
Conclusions:
- Standard laboratory identification and screening methods are inadequate for detecting VRE with low-level inducible resistance.
- Optimized screening protocols and advanced identification systems are necessary for effective VRE surveillance.
- Improved diagnostic strategies are essential to prevent VRE transmission and ensure timely patient care.
Related Concept Videos
Clinical Significance of Antibiotic Resistance
Mechanism of Antibiotic Resistance in MRSA
Investigation of Disease Outbreaks
Development of Antibiotic Resistance
Bacterial Gastroenteritis
Rapid Identification of Pathogens