Comparative evaluation of the QMAC-dRAST V2.0 system for rapid antibiotic susceptibility testing of Gram-negative blood culture isolates

Evaluation of the QMAC-dRAST System Version 2.5 for Rapid Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing of Gram-Negative Bacteria From Positive Blood Culture Broth and Subcultured Colony Isolates

BACKGROUND

Rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) for bloodstream infections (BSIs) facilitates the optimization of antimicrobial therapy, preventing antimicrobial resistance and improving patient outcomes. QMAC-dRAST (QuantaMatrix Inc., Korea) is a rapid AST platform based on microfluidic chip technology that performs AST directly using positive blood culture broth (PBCB). This study evaluated the performance of QMAC-dRAST for Gram-negative bacteria using PBCB and subcultured colony isolates, comparing it with that of VITEK 2 (bioMérieux, France) using broth microdilution (BMD) as the reference method.

METHODS

We included 141 Gram-negative blood culture isolates from patients with BSI and 12 carbapenemase-producing clinical isolates of Enterobacterales spiked into blood culture bottles. QMAC-dRAST performance was evaluated using PBCB and colony isolates, whereas VITEK 2 and BMD were tested only on colony isolates.

RESULTS

For PBCB, QMAC-dRAST achieved 92.1% categorical agreement (CA), 95.3% essential agreement (EA), with 1.8% very major errors (VMEs), 3.5% major errors (MEs), and 5.2% minor errors (mEs). With colony isolates, it exhibited 92.5% CA and 95.1% EA, with 2.0% VMEs, 3.2% MEs, and 4.8% mEs. VITEK 2 showed 94.1% CA and 96.0% EA, with 4.3% VMEs, 0.4% MEs, and 4.3% mEs. QMAC-dRAST yielded elevated error rates for specific antimicrobial agents, with high VMEs for carbapenems and aminoglycosides. The median time to result for QMAC-dRAST was 5.9 h for PBCB samples and 6.1 h for subcultured colony isolates.

CONCLUSIONS

The QMAC-dRAST system demonstrated considerable strengths and comparable performance to the VITEK 2 system; however, challenges were discerned with specific antimicrobial agents, underlining a necessity for improvement.

Rapid antimicrobial resistance detection methods for bloodstream infection in solid organ transplantation: Proposed clinical guidance, unmet needs, and future directions

Recent advances in antimicrobial resistance detection have spurred the development of multiple assays that can accurately detect the presence of bacterial resistance from positive blood cultures, resulting in faster institution of effective antimicrobial therapy. Despite these advances, there are limited data regarding the use of these assays in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients and there is little guidance on how to select, implement, and interpret them in clinical practice. We describe a practical approach to the implementation and interpretation of these assays in SOT recipients using the best available data and expert opinion. These findings were part of a consensus conference sponsored by the American Society of Transplantation held on December 7, 2021 and represent the collaboration between experts in transplant infectious diseases, pharmacy, antimicrobial and diagnostic stewardship, and clinical microbiology. Areas of unmet need and recommendations for future investigation are also presented.

QMAC-dRAST for the direct testing of antibiotic susceptibility for Enterobacterales in positive blood-culture broth: a comparison of the performances with the MicroScan system and direct disc diffusion testing methods

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the performances of the QMAC-dRAST GN (Gram-negative) kit for rapid antimicrobial sensitivity testing (AST) and two other methods, directly on positive blood-culture broth (PBCB), by comparison with a reference method: the MicroScan method based on broth microdilution on colonies isolated on PBCB subculture.

METHODS

In total, 156 samples were collected prospectively from blood cultures positive for a Gram-negative rod. Each sample was tested with four AST techniques: (i) the QMAC dRAST GN kit, (ii) the disc diffusion (DD) method, (iii) the MicroScan method applied directly to PBCB; and (iv) MicroScan with isolates from PBCB subculture, as a reference.

RESULTS

For 124 PBCB containing Enterobacterales, overall essential agreement (EA) and categorical agreement (CA) between the QMAC-dRAST on PBCB and the reference reached 95.7% and 93.5%, respectively. There were 3.0% very major errors (VME), 4.0% major errors (ME) and 2.8% minor errors (mE). A comparison of MicroScan on PBCB and the reference yielded 98.8% EA, 98.5% CA, and rates of 0.6% VME, 0.9% ME and 0.7% mE. The DD method on PBCB gave a CA of 95.8% and rates of 1.7% for VME, 2.0% for ME and 1.9% for mE. Results were obtained more rapidly for QMAC-dRAST (median of 6 h 37 min versus 18 h for the MicroScan and DD methods on PBCB).

CONCLUSIONS

The QMAC-dRAST system provided rapid results well correlated with the reference method on PBCB containing Enterobacterales. Given the shorter time-to-results, the QMAC-dRAST system constitutes a fast and reliable alternative to conventional AST methods.

Evaluation of an Antibiotic Susceptibility Testing Method on Enterobacterales-Positive Blood Cultures in Less Than 8 h Using the Rapid Mueller-Hinton Diffusion Method in Conjunction with the SIRscan 2000 Automatic Reading Device

Enterobacterales bloodstream infections are life-threatening and require rapid, targeted antibiotherapy based on antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST). A new method using Muller-Hinton Rapid-SIR (MHR-SIR) agar (i2a, Montpellier, France) allows complete direct AST (dAST) to be read from positive blood culture bottles (BCBs) for all Enterobacterales species after 6-8 h of incubation. We evaluated (i) the performance of dAST from positive BCBs on MHR-SIR agar using two different inoculum protocols; (ii) the categorical agreement between dAST results obtained with MHR-SIR agar vs. those obtained with Muller-Hinton (MH) agar; and (iii) the ability of the MHR-SIR medium to detect β-lactam resistant Enterobacterales. Finally, we estimated the saved turnaround time (TAT) with MHR-SIR compared with MH agar in our 24/7 laboratory. Our results showed that the most suitable inoculation protocol for dAST on MHR-SIR agar was 1 drop of BCB/5 mL H₂O. For monomicrobial Enterobacterales BCBs, dAST performed on MHR-SIR medium showed 99.3% categorical agreement with AST on MH agar. Furthermore, MHR-SIR agar allows early detection of β-lactam resistance mechanisms, including AmpC hyperproduction, extended-spectrum β-lactamase, and carbapenemase. Finally, TAT reduction in our 24/7 laboratory was 16 h, enabling a significantly faster provision of antibiotic advice.

Performance Evaluation of the Quantamatrix QMAC-dRAST System for Rapid Antibiotic Susceptibility Testing Directly from Blood Cultures

Objectives: Rapid antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST) for positive blood cultures can improve patient clinical outcomes if the time to an effective antimicrobial therapy is shortened. In this study, we tested the Quantamatrix dRAST system (QMAC-dRAST), a rapid AST system based on time-lapse microscopic imagery of bacterial colony formation in agarose. Methods: Evaluation of the QMAC-dRAST was performed from 250 monobacterial blood cultures including 130 Enterobacterales, 20 non-fermentative Gram-negative bacteria, 69 staphylococci and 31 enterococci. Blood cultures were recovered from anonymous patients or from spiking experiments to enrich our study with bacterial species and resistant strains. Categorical agreement (CA), minor errors (me), major errors (ME) and very major errors (VME) were calculated in comparison to the results obtained from the BD Phoenix™ M50. Discrepancies between the Phoenix™ M50 and QMAC-dRAST results were investigated using the gradient strip method. The repeatability and reproducibility performance of the QMAC-dRAST was assessed for 16 strains, each strain being tested five times from a spiked blood culture. Results: The overall CAs for Enterobacterales, non-fermentative Gram-negative bacteria, staphylococci and enterococci were 95.1%, 91.2%, 93.4% and 94.5%, respectively. The VME percentage was below 4% for all the groups except for staphylococci, which showed a VME rate of 7%. The median time to result was 6.7 h (range: 4.7–7.9). Repeatability and reproducibility assays showed a high reliability of AST results with best and worst ratios of 98.8% and 99.6% and 95.0% and 98.3%, respectively. Conclusions: The QMAC-dRAST is a fast and reliable system to determine AST directly from monobacterial blood cultures with a major TAT reduction compared to conventional AST testing.

Performance of dRAST on Prospective Clinical Blood Culture Samples in a Simulated Clinical Setting and on Multidrug-Resistant Bacteria

There is an utmost need for rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) of bacteria causing bloodstream infections (BSI). The dRAST (QuantaMatrix Inc., Seoul) is a commercial method that can be performed directly from positive blood cultures. The present study aims to evaluate the performance of the dRAST on prospective clinical blood culture samples. A sample prescreening algorithm based on clinical routine was used to choose relevant clinical positive blood culture samples for testing on the dRAST. Rapid identification via short-term culture followed by matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization–time of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) was used during the test run, and dRAST results were compared to European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) disk diffusion as the reference method. The performance of the dRAST was also evaluated on selected multidrug resistant (MDR) isolates in simulated blood cultures. Using the sample pre-screening algorithm, 242 clinical blood culture samples were selected and tested on the dRAST, of which 200 (82.6%) gave valid AST tests results comprising 76 Gram-positive and 124 Gram-negative samples. AST measurements from the dRAST and disk diffusion from clinical samples had an overall agreement rate of 95.5%. When using simulated blood culture samples of 31 selected MDR isolates, the agreement between dRAST and disk diffusion was 87.2%. While the agreement rates were high, it was noted that the dRAST was not reliable for AST of certain antibiotic–bacteria combinations. In conclusion, the present study demonstrates that dRAST delivers rapid AST results from blood cultures and using a prescreening algorithm for sample selection is important in implementation of modern AST methods such as dRAST.

IMPORTANCE There is an utmost need for rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) of bacteria causing bloodstream infections (BSI). The dRAST (QuantaMatrix Inc., Seoul) is a rapid AST method that can be performed directly from positive blood cultures. The dRAST gives results in 6 h compared to conventional AST methods that needs 18-20 h of incubation. The present study aims to evaluate the performance of the dRAST in a clinical setting with the use of a sample selection algorithm to reduce incompatible sample numbers. The study found that while the agreement rates between dRAST and reference AST methods were high, it was noted that the dRAST was not reliable for AST of certain antibiotic–bacteria combinations. In conclusion, the present study demonstrates that dRAST delivers rapid AST results from blood cultures and using a prescreening algorithm for sample selection is important in implementation of modern AST methods such as dRAST.

Recent Advances in Rapid Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing

Background

Antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) is classically performed using growth-based techniques that essentially require viable bacterial matter to become visible to the naked eye or a sophisticated densitometer.

Content

Technologies based on the measurement of bacterial density in suspension have evolved marginally in accuracy and rapidity over the 20th century, but assays expanded for new combinations of bacteria and antimicrobials have been automated, and made amenable to high-throughput turn-around. Over the past 25 years, elevated AST rapidity has been provided by nucleic acid-mediated amplification technologies, proteomic and other “omic” methodologies, and the use of next-generation sequencing. In rare cases, AST at the level of single-cell visualization was developed. This has not yet led to major changes in routine high-throughput clinical microbiological detection of antimicrobial resistance.

Summary

We here present a review of the new generation of methods and describe what is still urgently needed for their implementation in day-to-day management of the treatment of infectious diseases.

Assessment of version 2.5 of QMAC-dRAST for rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing with reduced sample-to-answer turnaround time and an integrated expert system

OBJECTIVE

To assess the performance of the new rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) QMAC-dRAST V2.5 system.

METHODS

ASTs were performed using QMAC-dRAST-V2.5 and a disk diffusion method, directly from positive blood bottles with Gram-negative bacteria. Discrepancies between the results obtained using the two methods were categorized into very major errors (VME, S with dRAST vs. R with disk diffusion), major errors (ME, R vs. S, respectively), minor errors (mE, S vs. I or I vs. R, respectively), and very minor errors (Vme, I vs. S or R vs. I, respectively). For each AST, results were recorded after 4, 5, and 6h of incubation.

RESULTS

From 106 bacteremia, 1416 individual AST results were obtained. Overall agreement between results using the two methods was 91%, ranging from 76.9% to 99.1% depending upon the antibiotic, with 128 errors, i.e. 14/1416 (1%) VME, 59/1416 (4.2%) ME, 25/1416 (1.8%) mE and 30/1416 (2.1%) Vme. VMEs were encountered for Klebsiellasp and Serratia marcescens isolates with low-level piperacillin and amikacin resistance, respectively. Using the integrated QMAC-dRAST-V2.5 expert system, all 14 VMEs and 3 mEs were eliminated, leading to 92.2% categorical agreement. After 45min of pre-incubation in the QMAC-dRAST-V2.5 device, 22.2% of the 1416 AST results were obtained after 4h, an additional 31.4% after 5h and a further 46.3% after 6h.

CONCLUSION

QMAC-dRAST-V2.5 is an optimized version of QMAC-dRAST V2.0, particularly with respect to utilization of an expert system and reduced TAT according to the antibiotic tested.

Performance of QMAC-dRASTTM (Direct Rapid Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing) - a Newcomer in Phenotypic Automatic AST

Objective:

QMAC-dRASTTM is a phenotypic automatized Antibiotic Susceptibility Testing (AST) system based on microfluidic chip technology enabling observation of changes in a single bacterial cell under antibiotic treatment conditions. The 96 wells plate with dried antibiotics comprises 19 and 17 antibiotics for the Gram-Negatives (GNs) and Gram-Positives (GPs), respectively. Categorical (Sensitive, Intermediate or Resistant) results were compared to results obtained by our laboratory standard susceptibility testing procedure and given as Categorical Agreement (CA).

Methods:

In a 3-month period (2019/2020), blood cultures detected positive were included. Excluded were known off-panel strains of QMAC-dRASTTM, such as Gram-positive bacilli, Streptococcus and Candida species. Percentages of CA (CA, %) between QMAC-dRASTTM and routine testing methods used in the laboratory (EUCAST disc diffusion and/or etest/Broth Micro Dilution MIC), were calculated.

Results:

255 positive blood cultures from as many patients were examined. Of the positive blood culture strains, 144 were GNs, and 111 were GPs. An overall combined CA,% of 96.3 (2410 of 2502 determinations) was obtained, and discrepancies were noted in 92 of 2502 test results (3.7%). The percentage of very major errors (VMEs) was 0.7% for GNs and 2.2% for GPs. For 87% of blood culture specimens examined, susceptibility reports were available within 6-7 hours.

Conclusion:

The high CA,% for as well GNs as GPs are promising. The presented time to report data obtained by QMAC-dRASTTM in this study being of 3-8 hours for blood culture specimens examined strongly support a further possible improvement in the workflow for handling blood stream infections.

Rapid Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing Methods for Blood Cultures and Their Clinical Impact

Antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) of bacteria isolated in blood cultures is critical for optimal management of patients with sepsis. This review describes new and emerging phenotypic and genotypic AST methods and summarizes the evidence that implementation of these methods can impact clinical outcomes of patients with bloodstream infections.