2007Journal of Antimicrobial ChemotherapyRequires access

Comparison of cefoxitin and moxalactam 30 µg disc diffusion methods for detection of methicillin resistance in coagulase-negative staphylococci

Olivier Join‐Lambert, Sylvain Clauser, Christelle Guillet, Jean‐Philippe Jaïs, Éric Abachin, Gilles Quesnes, Étienne Carbonnelle, Alban Le Monnier, Jean‐Ralph Zahar, Samer Kayal, Patrick Berche, Agnès Ferroni

Open publisher page 13 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To compare cefoxitin and/or moxalactam 30 microg disc diffusion (DD) methods to detect methicillin resistance in coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) using both high- and low-density (HD/LD) inoculum techniques. METHODS: A challenge set of 192 CoNS was tested. DD test results were compared with PBP2a detection. RESULTS: With the LD inoculum, the sensitivity/specificity of cefoxitin and moxalactam were 94.4%/100% and 100%/92.4%, respectively, using the DD breakpoints of the Comité de l'Antibiogramme de la Société Française de Microbiologie. With the HD inoculum, the sensitivity/specificity of cefoxitin and moxalactam were 93.7%/100% and 100%/96.9%, using the cefoxitin DD breakpoints of the CLSI and a resistant/susceptible breakpoint of < 20 mm/>or=20 mm for moxalactam. Comparison of receiver operating characteristic AUCs did not show significant difference between studied assays, but the overlapping zone where both PBP2a-positive and PBP2a-negative isolates were observed concerned a lower number of strains with moxalactam than with cefoxitin (P < 0.001). Combination of cefoxitin and moxalactam DD methods demonstrated that all isolates with a concordant cefoxitin/moxalactam phenotype were correctly classified. Interestingly, all isolates misclassified by each DD method used alone were cefoxitin-susceptible and moxalactam-resistant. CONCLUSIONS: Although all DD methods studied here performed well for detecting methicillin resistance in CoNS, moxalactam had a higher accuracy than cefoxitin to differentiate heteroresistant isolates from PBP2a-negative strains. Identification of isolates that should be submitted to a confirmatory test to conclude on methicillin resistance can be easily obtained by combining cefoxitin and moxalactam DD methods.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

OBJECTIVES: To compare cefoxitin and/or moxalactam 30 microg disc diffusion (DD) methods to detect methicillin resistance in coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) using both high- and low-density (HD/LD) inoculum techniques. METHODS: A challenge set of 192 CoNS was tested. DD test results were compared with PBP2a detection. RESULTS: With the LD inoculum, the sensitivity/specificity of cefoxitin and moxalactam were 94.4%/100% and 100%/92.4%, respectively, using the DD breakpoints of the Comité de l'Antibiogramme de la Société Française de Microbiologie. With the HD inoculum, the sensitivity/specificity of cefoxitin and moxalactam were 93.7%/100% and 100%/96.9%, using the cefoxitin DD breakpoints of the CLSI and a resistant/susceptible breakpoint of < 20 mm/>or=20 mm for moxalactam. Comparison of receiver operating characteristic AUCs did not show significant difference between studied assays, but the overlapping zone where both PBP2a-positive and PBP2a-negative isolates were observed concerned a lower number of strains with moxalactam than with cefoxitin (P < 0.001). Combination of cefoxitin and moxalactam DD methods demonstrated that all isolates with a concordant cefoxitin/moxalactam phenotype were correctly classified. Interestingly, all isolates misclassified by each DD method used alone were cefoxitin-susceptible and moxalactam-resistant. CONCLUSIONS: Although all DD methods studied here performed well for detecting methicillin resistance in CoNS, moxalactam had a higher accuracy than cefoxitin to differentiate heteroresistant isolates from PBP2a-negative strains. Identification of isolates that should be submitted to a confirmatory test to conclude on methicillin resistance can be easily obtained by combining cefoxitin and moxalactam DD methods.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 13 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

OBJECTIVES: To compare cefoxitin and/or moxalactam 30 microg disc diffusion (DD) methods to detect methicillin resistance in coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) using both high- and low-density (HD/LD) inoculum techniques. METHODS: A challenge set of 192 CoNS was tested. DD test results were compared with PBP2a detection. RESULTS: With the LD inoculum, the sensitivity/specificity of cefoxitin and moxalactam were 94.4%/100% and 100%/92.4%, respectively, using the DD breakpoints of the Comité de l'Antibiogramme de la Société Française de Microbiologie. With the HD inoculum, the sensitivity/specificity of cefoxitin and moxalactam were 93.7%/100% and 100%/96.9%, using the cefoxitin DD breakpoints of the CLSI and a resistant/susceptible breakpoint of < 20 mm/>or=20 mm for moxalactam. Comparison of receiver operating characteristic AUCs did not show significant difference between studied assays, but the overlapping zone where both PBP2a-positive and PBP2a-negative isolates were observed concerned a lower number of strains with moxalactam than with cefoxitin (P < 0.001). Combination of cefoxitin and moxalactam DD methods demonstrated that all isolates with a concordant cefoxitin/moxalactam phenotype were correctly classified. Interestingly, all isolates misclassified by each DD method used alone were cefoxitin-susceptible and moxalactam-resistant. CONCLUSIONS: Although all DD methods studied here performed well for detecting methicillin resistance in CoNS, moxalactam had a higher accuracy than cefoxitin to differentiate heteroresistant isolates from PBP2a-negative strains. Identification of isolates that should be submitted to a confirmatory test to conclude on methicillin resistance can be easily obtained by combining cefoxitin and moxalactam DD methods.

Key concepts: Cefoxitin, Moxalactam, Microbiology, Coagulase, Medicine, Cephalosporin, Biology, Staphylococcus

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparison of cefoxitin and moxalactam 30 µg disc diffusion methods for detection of methicillin resistance in coagulase-negative staphylococci — Research Paper | ScholarLens