quality control testing for rapid antimicrobial sensitivity testing (rast)

Accelerated Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing in Blood Culture Bottles

Sepsis, an important global health problem, is defined as life-threatening organ dysfunction due to a dysregulated host response to infection. The Global Burden of Diseases Study estimated that there were 48.9 million cases of sepsis and 11 million sepsis-related deaths worldwide in 2017, which accounted for almost 20% of all global deaths1. Around 2/3rd of bloodstream infections (BSI) causing mortality are due to gram-negative bacterial pathogens2. The leading causes of mortality amongst gram-negatives (GN) are Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Acinetobacter baumannii,&#160;which account for around 40% of cases amongst 33 bacterial pathogens2.
Blood cultures remain the gold standard for diagnosing BSI, and rapid microbial identification along with antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) results is the key to management. It has been estimated that there is a 9% increase in odds of mortality with each-hour delay in instituting appropriate antimicrobials in sepsis3. The turnaround time (TAT) of microbiologically positive blood culture reports with AST results is around 48-72 h with the available microbiological tools in resource-limited settings, even with automated systems. As a result of this subpar TAT, broad-spectrum antimicrobials are used empirically, contributing to the burgeoning problem of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Recognizing this dire need to reduce TAT for microbiological culture techniques for sepsis, EUCAST and CLSI are moving towards performing AST directly from positively flagged blood culture bottles (+aBC)4,5.
In 2018, EUCAST first introduced the rapid AST (RAST) method for determining AST by Kirby-Bauer disk diffusion method at short incubation times, i.e., 4 h, 6 h and 8 h, directly from +aBC6,7. The method is presently validated for determining AST for +aBCs containing one of the 8 most common causes of BSI namely E. coli, K. pneumoniae, P. aeruginosa, and A. baumannii complex&#160;amongst gram-negatives and Staphylococcus aureus, Enterococcus faecalis, E. faecium, and Streptococcus pneumoniae amongst gram-positives8.The breakpoints for AST determination at various time intervals are provided as per microbial species listed above. Hence, before categorical interpretation of AST results, microbial identification is necessary. However, the RAST standard does not specify the method to enable microbial identification within this time frame.
The majority of studies evaluating the EUCAST RAST method in their setting have used mass spectrometry-based microbial identification after short incubation on plated media to identify micro-organisms9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17. However, mass spectrometry instruments are not widely available, especially in low to middle-income countries (LMICs), which greatly limits the potential usefulness of this method. Few studies have reported implementation of this method in their centers without using mass spectrometry18,19,20. Tay&#351;i et al.18 reported a broad categorization of GN amongst Enterobacterales, Pseudomonas, and Acinetobacter spp. based on gram stain morphology and oxidase test before interpreting AST results. In other studies from this center, by Gupta et al.19 and Siddiqui et al.20, species-level microbial identification was done by preparing a bacterial pellet from the positively flagged blood-broth mixture and inoculating it on the conventional biochemical tests. While Tay&#351;i et al.18 did not comment upon the accuracy of microbial identification with their approach, Gupta et al.19 reported that with their approach in 165/176 (94%) cases, a RAST reportable gram-negative (RR-GN), i.e., either of E. coli, K. pneumoniae, P. aeruginosa, and A. baumannii complex. However, with the latter approach, the reading of RAST results was done retrospectively using 8 h zone diameter breakpoints only after the full incubation of conventional biochemical results i.e., 18-24 h post-inoculation, and the average time for reporting was around 2 days.
To reduce the TAT of clinical reports further, we propose an alternative methodology to enable early identification of GN present in +aBCs using aMIAST. Before the introduction of mass spectrometry-based microbial identification systems, these automated identification systems were considered the standard of care for microbial identification, where identification was enabled by colorimetric and/or fluorometric changes induced by test bacteria when inoculated in miniaturized biochemical tests harbored in a cassette and matching the results with their isolate database. The average time to identification in these systems is around 4 h to 8 h however, they are limited by the fact that the manufacturers recommend overnight growth of microbes before their respective identification cards can be inoculated. This requirement greatly limits their usefulness in reducing the time to report.
Few studies have evaluated methods to directly identify microbes from +aBCs using these automated systems21,22,23,24,25,26,27. In the case of +aBCs containing monomorphic GN, the majority of studies showed excellent concordance between direct inoculation from bacterial pellet made from positive blood-broth mixture and standard colony incubation. However, in the case of gram-positives, the concordance rates were suboptimal. As the average time to positivity of +aBCs is between 8 h and 16 h and identification of GN takes ~4 h to 8 h in an automated microbial identification system, we hypothesize that by employing direct inoculation protocol in the automated microbial identification, we can complete the clinical reporting of +aBCs with GN having a RR-GN within 24 h of sample receiving.
Setting for the study 
The present study was conducted in the clinical bacteriology laboratory of a 950-bed, academic, tertiary care institute of national importance (INI) in Central India from January to October 2023. The laboratory is equipped with a continuous blood culture monitoring system (CBCMS) and aMIAST. The bacteriology laboratory is functional round-the-clock with the availability of technicians and microbiologists for processing and reporting any positively flagged blood culture bottle (+aBCs).
Microbial methods used here 
The workflow of the study is shown in Figure 1. The +aBCs showing monomorphic GNs (+naBC) were processed by direct inoculation of corresponding identification cards to enable identification and AST using EUCAST RAST protocol. These results were compared with the standard-of-care (SoC) method for +aBCs i.e., subculturing on conventional plated media through sheep blood agar (SBA), chocolate agar (CA), and MacConkey agar (MA), incubated aerobically for 16 h to 24 h followed by identification and AST cards given by aMIAST when isolated colonies appear. Blood cultures showing gram-positive cocci, gram-positive bacilli, budding yeast cells, and &#8805;2 different micro-organisms on initial gram staining or plated media were excluded from the study.

Author Spotlight: Accelerating Diagnostic Accuracy with Direct Identification of Gram-Negatives from Blood Culture Bottles

Direct Microbial Identification using An Automated Microbial Identification System to Facilitate the EUCAST RAST Method Without Mass Spectrometry

This research aims to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of Gram-negatives directly from positively flag blood culture bottles by automated microbial identification system. The purpose is to utilize it as a tool for early clinical reporting by EUCAST rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing method. EUCAST RAST method was recently introduced in 2018 to enable reporting of anti-microbial susceptibility testing results within four to eight hours of positive flagging of automated blood culture bottles.It involves performing everywhere disk diffusion method directly from positively flagged bottle and reading results at either four, six, or eight hours. For clinical reporting by EUCAST RAST method, the microbial identification is a prerequisite for determining the interpretative category of AST results. The major challenge in implementing this method is early identification of the microbes within eight hours, especially in resource poor settings, which lacks mass spectrometry.We found that the direct inoculum protocol was around 94%accurate in identifying a RAST reportable Gram-negative, which includes Escherichia coli, Kiebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Acinetobacter baumannii complex. This approach of identifying Gram-negatives directly was around four times faster than the standard approach of identification after overnight incubation. We will now focus on assessing the impact of this approach of clinical reporting in Gram-negative sepsis on patient outcomes in terms of length of hospitalization and mortality rate.Furthermore, it can also be used as a tool to reduce anti-microbial usage to facilitate anti-microbial stewardship.

Quality Control Testing for Rapid Antimicrobial Sensitivity Testing (RAST)

For the weekly quality control testing of the RAST method, place four sterile glass tubes on a tube stand. Dispense sterile saline into the tubes. Next, transfer the QC strain from the isolated colonies of an overnight culture into the first tube to create a 0.5 McFarland suspension.With a sterile pipette and tip, transfer 10 microliters of the suspension from the first tube to the second tube. Once mixed, transfer 10 microliters of the suspension from the second to the third tube, and then to the last tube. Next, take one milliliter of the inoculum from the last tube with a sterile syringe.Transfer the inoculum into an automated blood culture bottle after swabbing the septum with 70%isopropyl alcohol. Simultaneously with a separate sterile needle, add five milliliters of sterile sheep blood into the same blood culture bottle. Incubate it in a continuous blood culture monitoring system until it flags positive.

quality-control-testing-for-rapid-antimicrobial-sensitivity-testing

Research

JoVE Journal

Medicine

23 次观看. 对于 RAST 方法的每周质量控制测试，将四个无菌玻璃管放在管架上。将无菌盐水分配到试管中。接下来，将 QC 菌株从过夜培养物的分离菌落转移到第一管中，以制备 0.5 McFarland 悬浮液。使用无菌移液管和吸头，将 10 微升悬浮液从第一管转移到第二管。混合后，将 10 微升悬浮液从第二管转移到第三管，然后转移到最后一管。接下来，用无菌注射器从最后一管中取出 1 毫?...