THE VALUE OF DIRECT ANTIBIOTIC SURVEYING FROM A POSITIVE WARN BLOOD CULTURE ON A BACT/ALERT 3D120 SYSTEM VINMEC TIMES CITY INTERNATIONAL GENERAL HOSPITAL
Main Article Content
Abstract
Objectives: (1) To determine the degree of agreement in the classification of susceptibility, intermediate, and resistance between the direct antimicrobial susceptibility testing method from positive blood samples and the routine antibiotic susceptibility testing method from colonies using the BD Phoenix M50 system; (2) To determine the rate of very major errors and major errors between two methods.
Subjects and methods: 195 blood samples from January 2023 to December 2025 at Vinmec Times City International General Hospital were automatically incubated using the BacT/Alert 3D 120 system, showing positive results for the first isolated, preliminary staining for Gram-negative bacilli, and bacterial identification after subculture belonging to Enterobacterales and P.aeruginosa. The samples were subjected to direct antimicrobial susceptibility testing based on CLSI M100, and blood agar was subcultured for the identification and routine antibiotic susceptibility testing steps.
Results: The agreement on classification between the direct antibiotic susceptibility testing method from blood bottles and the routine antibiotic susceptibility testing method for Enterobacterales and P.aeruginosa strains of 95%, and 100%, respectively. Most antibiotic-bacteria combinations showed very major error rates and major error rates below 3%.
Article Details
Keywords
Direct antibimicrobial susceptibility testing, very major errors, major errors
References
[2] Khan S, Das A, Mishra A et al. Evaluation of three protocols for direct susceptibility testing for Gram-negative rods from flagged positive blood culture bottles. Microbiol Spectr, 2024, 12 (4): e0308123. doi: 10.1128/spectrum.03081-23.
[3] Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing supplement M100, 35th ed, 2025.
[4] Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Development of in vitro susceptibility test methods, breakpoints, and quality control parameters, M23-Ed6, 7/2023.
[5] Bạch Quốc Khánh, Bùi Thị Vân Nga, Nguyễn Hà Thanh, Vũ Đức Bình. Nghiên cứu mô hình vi khuẩn - vi nấm gây nhiễm trùng huyết tại Viện Huyết học truyền máu Trung ương giai đoạn 2019-2021. Tạp chí Y học Việt Nam, 2024, 535 (1): 119-123. doi: 10.51298/vmj.v535i1.8362.
[6] Trần Anh Đào, Trần Tất Thắng và cộng sự. Khảo sát tỷ lệ nhiễm, mức độ kháng kháng sinh của Escherichia coli gây nhiễm khuẩn huyết được phân lập tại Bệnh viện Hữu nghị Đa khoa Nghệ An (01/01/2019-31/12/2019). Tạp chí Truyền nhiễm Việt Nam, 2020, 30 (2): 84-88. doi: 10.59873/vjid.v2i30.165.
[7] Kumar M, Shergill S.P, Tandel K, Sahai K, Gupta R.M. Direct antimicrobial susceptibility testing from positive blood culture bottles in laboratories lacking automated antimicrobial susceptibility testing systems. Med J Armed Forces India, 2019, 75 (4): 450-457. doi: 10.1016/j.mjafi.2018.08.010.
[8] Kesavan R, Ramani C.P, Sudha N, Rajasree S. A study on direct antimicrobial susceptibility testing of positive blood culture broth using BacT/Alert 3D microbial identification system in a tertiary care hospital. Asian Journal of Medical Sciences, 2024, 15 (5): 173-180. doi: 10.3126/ajms.v15i5.63071.