Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 13, 2025

Antimicrobial Synergy Testing by the Inkjet Printer-assisted Automated Checkerboard Array and the Manual Time-kill Method
Published on: April 18, 2019
Differences in antimicrobial susceptibility testing complicating management of IMP carbapenemase-producing
1School of Medicine, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland; Department of Clinical Microbiology, St Vincent's University Hospital, Elm Park, Dublin D04 T6F4, Ireland.
Objectives:
IMP-type carbapenemases are rarely detected in Europe and limited information is available to guide the treatment of infections caused by carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales (CPE) producing these carbapenemases. Accurate antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) results are essential for optimal antibiotic management. Here we report discrepancies in AST of IMP-producing Enterobacterales (IMP-CPE) complicating the management of severe sepsis.
Methods:
Antimicrobial susceptibilities were analysed by in-house VITEK® 2, Etest and broth microdilution (BMD). Carbapenemase-encoding genes were detected by PCR. Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) was performed using an Illumina MiSeq platform.
Results:
Minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) determined by VITEK® 2 for Enterobacter hormaechei and Klebsiella oxytoca blood culture isolates were ≥16 mg/L for meropenem and ≤0.5 mg/L for ertapenem. In contrast, Etest analysis and BMD returned MICs of 2 mg/L and 1 mg/L, respectively. Both isolates tested positive for IMP carbapenemase-encoding genes by PCR. WGS revealed that both isolates carried the same blaIMP-4 gene. Based on VITEK® 2 susceptibilities, initial treatment was with tigecycline and amikacin. After subsequent deterioration, the patient was successfully treated with ertapenem and amikacin.
Conclusion:
This case highlights that automated AST by VITEK® 2 can over-report meropenem resistance for IMP carbapenemase-producers compared with Etest and BMD. Clinicians need to be cautious deciding against carbapenem treatment based on VITEK® 2 susceptibility testing results for IMP-positive Enterobacterales. Tigecycline was inferior to carbapenem treatment for pyelonephritis caused by isolates expressing IMP carbapenemases, however specific evidence guiding the treatment of these infections is lacking.
Insights
Accurate antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) is crucial for treating infections caused by IMP carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales (IMP-CPE). Automated VITEK® 2 testing may overestimate meropenem resistance, potentially delaying effective carbapenem treatment.
Area of Science:
- Medical Microbiology
- Infectious Diseases
- Antimicrobial Resistance
Background:
- IMP-type carbapenemases are rare in Europe, with limited guidance for treating infections caused by carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales (CPE).
- Accurate antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) is vital for effective antibiotic management of severe sepsis and other infections.
Purpose of the Study:
- To report discrepancies in AST results for IMP-producing Enterobacterales (IMP-CPE).
- To highlight challenges in managing severe sepsis due to potential inaccuracies in automated AST.
Main Methods:
- Antimicrobial susceptibilities were analyzed using VITEK® 2, Etest, and broth microdilution (BMD).
- Carbapenemase-encoding genes were identified via PCR, and whole-genome sequencing (WGS) was performed.
Main Results:
- VITEK® 2 overestimated meropenem resistance for IMP-CPE isolates compared to Etest and BMD.
- Despite initial treatment with tigecycline and amikacin based on VITEK® 2 results, ertapenem and amikacin led to successful patient recovery.
- WGS confirmed the presence of the blaIMP-4 gene in both isolates.
Conclusions:
- Automated AST (VITEK® 2) may inaccurately report meropenem resistance in IMP carbapenemase-producers.
- Clinicians should exercise caution with VITEK® 2 results for IMP-positive Enterobacterales and consider carbapenem therapy.
- Carbapenem treatment appears more effective than tigecycline for IMP carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales infections, though further evidence is needed.
More Related Videos
08:30One-day Workflow Scheme for Bacterial Pathogen Detection and Antimicrobial Resistance Testing from Blood Cultures
Published on: July 9, 2012
05:06Author Spotlight: Advancing Antibiotic Resistance Research Using an Efflux-Deficient Bacterial Strain and a Single-Copy Gene Expression System
Published on: January 5, 2024
Related Concept Videos
Development of Antibiotic Resistance
Urine Studies II: Urine Culture and Sensitivity Test
Antimicrobial Effectiveness
Antibiotic Selection
Acute Pyelonephritis II: Diagnostic Studies and Management
Combined Effects of Drugs: Synergism
Such synergistic combinations...