Comparison of screening methods for TEM- and SHV-derived extended-spectrum β-lactamase detection

AbstractObjective To compare common extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL) screening methods and β-lactams for their ability to detect TEM- and SHV-related ESBL enzymes.Methods This study compared disk diffusion testing by NCCLS methodology, the Jarlier double disk test, a disk-on-disk test, a modified three-dimensional test and the E test method for their sensitivity and specificity in detecting TEM- and SHV-related ESBL producers. Three negative and 22 positive controls were studied. These were two Klebsiella pneumoniae and 23 Escherichia coli transconjugants. Seventeen β-lactam antibiotics were tested: cefamandole, cefotetan, cefoxitin, cefuroxime, cefixime, cefoperazone, cefotaxime, cefpodoxime, cefsulodin, ceftazidime, ceftibuten, ceftizoxime, ceftriaxone, moxalactam, cefepime, cefpirome and aztreonam.Results NCCLS disk diffusion was 14% sensitive with ceftriaxone, 36% with cefotaxime, 64% with aztreonam, 68% with cefpodoxime, and 73% with ceftazidime. Cefoperazone, cefamandole, cefpodoxime and cefpirome showed 91% sensitivity using the Jarlier test. Using the disk-on-disk test, cefsulodin showed 95% sensitivity, and cefoperazone, cefepime and cefamandole showed 91% sensitivity. With the modified three-dimensional test, cefoperazone, cefpodoxime and cefpirome showed 91% sensitivity.Conclusions For practical reasons, we would recommend use of either the Jarlier test or the commercial cephalosporin disks containing clavulanic acid to screen for ESBL producers. Cefoperazone, cefamandole, cefpodoxime and cefpirome showed good sensitivity across the methods tested