Abstract
Rapid and accurate detection of vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VREs) can aid in the early application of appropriate antimicrobial treatment and the implementation of infection prevention measures. The VIASURE real-time PCR assay (Certest Biotec) is a multiplex nucleic acid-based in vitro diagnostic test intended for the detection of vanA and vanB, and geneLEAD VIII (Precision System Science) is a customizable, fully automated molecular detection platform. We evaluated the performance of the VIASURE assay on the geneLEAD VIII platform against 200 clinical enterococcal isolates consisting of 151 VREs and 49 vancomycin-susceptible enterococci collected in Japan, primarily in the Kinki region, and compared it to that of the in-house reference multiplex PCR assay. The performance of the VIASURE assay for the detection of vanA and vanB was comparable to that of the reference multiplex PCR assay, with both a sensitivity and specificity of 100%. Compared with the reference PCR assay, the VIASURE assay reduced the turn-around time by ~3 h 40 min (5 h 34 min vs. 1 h 54 min) and the hands-on time by 46 min per four samples. Fully automated molecular detection of vanA and vanB using the VIASURE assay and geneLEAD VIII for bacterial isolates can enable fast and reliable testing while reducing labour and is a promising tool for clinical laboratories and nosocomial infection control.
Keywords: automation, enterococci, real-time PCR, vanA, vanB, vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VREs)
Data Summary
All data used in this study are available within the manuscript and supplemental materials.
Introduction
Enterococci are commensal organisms that live in the human gastrointestinal tract, and they rarely cause infections in healthy individuals. However, some enterococci species, especially Enterococcus faecalis and Enterococcus faecium, which are one of the most commonly detected nosocomial pathogens, can cause severe hospital-associated infections in immunocompromised patients, such as those with cancer or serious underlying diseases [1,4]. Vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VREs) are considered a significant global threat associated with antimicrobial resistance [5], and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated that VREs caused 54,500 hospitalized infections and 5,400 deaths in the USA in 2017 [6]. Vancomycin resistance is also independently associated with increased mortality among patients with enterococcal bloodstream infections [7,9]. Rapid diagnostic testing and subsequent infection control for VREs decrease the time needed to initiate effective and appropriate antimicrobial therapy and reduce hospital costs [10,13].
The most prevalent vancomycin resistance mechanism of enterococci is the acquisition of the vanA or vanB genes [14,16]. The Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) defines VREs as enterococci with a vancomycin MIC of ≥32 µg ml−1. Traditional culture and antimicrobial susceptibility testing-based methods often take several days to complete and may miss enterococci with vancomycin resistance genes [17,20] because of the presence of isolates with vancomycin MICs of <32 µg ml−1 [21]. Therefore, PCR-based detection assays targeting vanA and vanB have been developed and introduced into clinical laboratories [22,26]. Some of them run on a fully automated platform, providing results within an hour and allowing direct analysis of clinical specimens [24]. Direct detection of VREs offers a greater reduction in testing time by eliminating the need for bacterial culture. However, routine implementation of direct detection is limited by its high cost. Since culture remains essential for antimicrobial susceptibility testing and performing additional analyses such as strain typing, culture and molecular testing approaches cannot be entirely replaced. For these reasons, automation of molecular testing of VRE isolates remains an important strategy for enabling timely infection control interventions while minimizing the laboratory workload.
The VIASURE Vancomycin resistance Real Time PCR Detection Kit (Certest Biotec, Zaragoza, Spain), designed to detect vanA and vanB, has been commercially available in Spain and several European countries since 2018. geneLEAD VIII (Precision System Science, Chiba, Japan) is a customizable, fully automated molecular detection platform that can perform DNA extraction, amplification, real-time PCR and result interpretation with a maximum of eight samples per batch. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the performance of automated VIASURE assay testing on the geneLEAD VIII platform using clinical VRE isolates collected in Japan.
Methods
Bacterial isolates
A total of 200 clinical isolates of Enterococcus spp. (E. faecium, Enterococcus gallinarum, E. faecalis, Enterococcus casseliflavus, Enterococcus avium, Enterococcus raffinosus, Enterococcus thailandicus and Enterococcus pallens; Table 1), comprising 151 VRE isolates and 49 vancomycin-sensitive enterococci (VSE) isolates, were included. Among these, 148 VRE and 18 VSE isolates were collected from 39 facilities (hospitals, long-term care facilities and clinical laboratories) in Kyoto and 11 other prefectures of Japan during surveillance programmes performed since 2005 [27,28]. Three VRE and 31 VSE isolates were collected at Kyoto University Hospital, Kyoto, Japan, between 2021 and 2023. The VSE isolates collected at Kyoto University Hospital were randomly selected from 264 strains obtained from blood culture specimens. This study used only bacterial strains that had been anonymized and assigned unique research identification numbers with no linkage to patient-identifying information. VRE isolates were defined as isolates with a vancomycin MIC of ≥32 µg ml−1 and the presence of vanA and/or vanB according to the reference PCR assay. VSE isolates were defined as isolates with a vancomycin MIC of ≤16 µg ml−1. Antimicrobial susceptibility was evaluated by broth microdilution at each laboratory following the CLSI guideline M100-Ed35 [29]. Species identification was performed by MALDI-TOF MS using the MBT Compass software (version 4.1; Bruker Daltonics, Bremen, Germany). The isolates stored at −80 °C were cultured on TSA II 5% sheep blood agar M (Becton Dickinson, Tokyo, Japan). All plates were incubated aerobically at 35 °C for 48 h, and bacterial suspensions of 1.0 McFarland were prepared using 1 ml of saline solution (Eiken Chemical, Tokyo, Japan) for molecular testing. The same bacterial suspension was aliquoted and used for both the VIASURE assay and the reference PCR assay.
Table 1. Enterococcal isolates used in this study and the results of the reference PCR assay.
Species | Total (n=200) | VRE* (n=151) | VSE* (n=49) | |
---|---|---|---|---|
vanA+, vanB− (n=76) | vanA−, vanB+ (n=75) | vanA−, vanB− | ||
E. faecium | 71 (35.5) | 42 (55.3) | 20 (26.7) | 9 (18.4) |
E. gallinarum | 58† (29.0) | 31 (40.8) | 20 (26.7) | 7 (14.3) |
E. faecalis | 44 (22.0) | 0 (0) | 30 (40.0) | 14 (28.6) |
E. casseliflavus | 12‡ (6.0) | 0 (0) | 5 (6.7) | 7 (14.3) |
E. avium | 8 (4.0) | 3 (3.9) | 0 (0) | 5 (10.2) |
E. raffinosus | 5 (2.5) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 5 (10.2) |
E. thailandicus | 1 (0.5) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 1 (2.0) |
E. pallens | 1 (0.5) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 1 (2.0) |
*Superscript plus symbols indicate the presence of the gene, and superscript minus symbols indicate its absence.
†vanC1 was detected in 57 isolates (98.3%).
‡vanC2/3 was detected in seven isolates (58.3%).
VIASURE assay
DNA was extracted from 200 µl of bacterial suspension using MagDEA Dx SV (Precision System Science) and eluted in 50 µl. The real-time PCRs were performed with a VIASURE Vancomycin resistance Real Time PCR Detection Kit (Certest Biotec), which targets vanA, vanB and internal controls, according to the manufacturer’s protocol. Briefly, 390 µl of rehydration buffer was added to the reaction mixture tube to rehydrate the lyophilized reagent. Seventeen microlitres of the reaction mixture were dispensed into a geneLEAD VIII PCR Reagent Cassette (Precision System Science) per isolate, of which 15 µl of the reaction mixture was used for real-time PCR. The cycling protocol consisted of 1 cycle of 2 min at 95 °C followed by 45 cycles of denaturation for 10 s at 95 °C, annealing and extension for 50 s at 60 °C. Cycle threshold (CT) values of <40 for vanA and/or vanB were considered positive for the vancomycin resistance genes. CT values of ≥40 for vanA and vanB were considered negative if the CT values for the internal control were in the valid range of <40. The negative and positive controls of the kit were used as control samples for each run. The negative controls were loaded as 200 µl samples on the instrument. The positive controls were dissolved in 100 µl of nuclease-free water, 20 µl of which was diluted tenfold with nuclease-free water and loaded onto the instrument as samples. Preparation for automated testing was conducted following geneLEAD VIII software, which guides the placement of 1.5 ml tubes containing bacterial suspensions or controls, elution tubes, tip racks, MagDEA Dx SV extraction reagent cartridges, a geneLEAD VIII Reaction Cassette (PCR chamber; Precision System Science) and a geneLEAD VIII Reagent Cassette containing the reaction mix at appropriate positions on the deck (Fig. 1). The entire testing process, including interpretations of the test results, was automatically performed. The run time of one batch (up to eight samples) was ~100 min.
Fig. 1. Preparation of the instrument and results of the VIASURE assay using the geneLEAD VIII platform. (a) Arrangement of tubes, tip racks and reagents on the geneLEAD VIII deck. (b) The geneLEAD VIII screen showing the assay setup. Sample and elution tube identifiers were entered using a barcode reader. After the assay name was selected, geneLEAD VIII guided the deck setup process shown in panel (a). (c) The geneLEAD VIII screen showing the results. Amplification curves and CT values of vanA, vanB and internal control targets are displayed. Assay interpretations are also displayed (not shown).
Reference PCR assay
DNA was obtained from 200 µl bacterial suspensions using a QIAamp DNA Mini Kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany). The extracted DNA was eluted with 100 µl of elution buffer. In-house multiplex PCR was performed according to a previous report [30] using TaKaRa Ex Taq (Takara Bio, Shiga, Japan). This assay detects seven different genes: vanA, vanB, vanC1, vanC2/C3, ddlE. faecalis, ddlE. faecium and rrs (16S rRNA gene of enterococci). We used vanA-positive E. faecium (FN1), vanB-positive E. faecalis (WBH13116), vanC1-positive E. gallinarum (H51) and vanC2-positive E. casseliflavus (C41) as positive controls and nuclease-free water as a negative control.
Test time measurement
The time required to perform each test step for the testing of four samples was measured in triplicate for the VIASURE assays and the reference PCR assay. Trials were performed by the same skilled operator on different days. The turn-around time was defined as the time from the preparation of the bacterial suspensions to the availability of the test results.
Statistical analysis
For vanA and vanB, the agreement between the VIASURE and reference PCR assays was assessed with positive percentage agreement (PPA), negative percentage agreement (NPA) and overall percentage agreement (OPA). PPA and NPA (with two-sided 95% CIs) were calculated for each vancomycin-resistant genotype and compared via the McNemar test. Cohen’s kappa coefficient was calculated to assess the overall agreement between the VIASURE and reference PCR assays. A P value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant for all analyses. All the statistical analyses were performed using Stata, version 13.1 (StataCorp, College Station, TX).
Results
Eight species of enterococci were represented in the 200 study isolates: E. faecium (n=71, 35.5%), E. gallinarum (n=58, 29.0%), E. faecalis (n=44, 22.0%), E. casseliflavus (n=12, 6.0%) and other species (n=15, 7.5%) (Table 1). Among the 151 VRE isolates, the reference PCR assay detected vanA in 76 isolates and vanB in 75 isolates. The numbers and percentages of VRE isolates positive for vanA/vanB in each species were as follows: E. faecium (n=62, vanA/vanB: 67.7/32.3%), E. gallinarum (n=51, 60.8/39.2%), E. faecalis (n=30, 0/100%), E. casseliflavus (n=5, 0/100%) and E. avium (n=3, 100/0%). vanC1 and vanC2/3 were detected in only E. gallinarum and E. casseliflavus, respectively. No vancomycin resistance genes (vanA, vanB, vanC1 or vanC2/3) were detected in the 41 VSE isolates. The results of the VIASURE and reference PCR assay were completely concordant. For both vanA and vanB, PPAs, NPAs, OPAs and Cohen’s kappa values were 100% (95% CI, 95.2–100%), 100% (95% CI, 97.0–100%), 100% and 1, respectively. The PPA and NPA values did not differ significantly. All test results for each isolate, including the CT values obtained from the VIASURE assay, are provided in Dataset S1, available in the online Supplementary Material 1.
The average turn-around time of the reference PCR assay was ~5 h 34 min for four samples, and the hands-on time was 56 min (Fig. 2 and Dataset S2). In contrast, the turn-around time of the VIASURE assay was ~1 h 54 min. The hands-on time was 10 min, and the remaining time was the run time of geneLEAD VIII. Compared with the reference PCR assay, the VIASURE assay reduced the turn-around time by ~3 h 40 min and the hands-on time by 46 min.
Fig. 2. Comparison of average test times for each test step between the VIASURE assay and the reference PCR assay. Panel (a) shows the turn-around time, and panel (b) shows the hands-on time.
Discussion
The international prevalence of vancomycin-resistant E. faecium has been increasing; the European Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance Network and the Central Asian and European Surveillance of Antimicrobial Resistance surveillance programmes show that vancomycin resistance rates in E. faecium increased from 15.0% in 2017 to 17.2% in 2021 [31]. E. faecium is also the most frequently reported VRE strain in Japan [32]. The most dominant vancomycin resistance gene type (i.e. vanA or vanB) varies from country to country [33,38], and in some countries, the predominant type has changed over time [16,39,41]. Several outbreaks caused by VRE strains with vanA have been reported in Japan [28,42,44], but the number of VRE strains with vanA and vanB in this study was similar. This can be explained by the fact that most of the study isolates were derived from surveillance programmes, mainly in the Kyoto region, reflecting the local epidemiological patterns [27,28]. None of the VRE isolates studied carried both vanA and vanB, although such strains have been reported outside Japan (e.g. Denmark, Greece and Vietnam) [39,45, 46].
The 100% concordance was observed between the VIASURE and reference PCR assays. This may have been influenced by the use of bacterial colonies rather than clinical specimens, the use of the same bacterial suspension for both assays and the fact that many of the VRE isolates originated from regional outbreaks, potentially leading to uniform genetic profiles, in addition to the implementation of standardized and quality-controlled laboratory procedures.
Comparative characteristics of molecular assays using fully automated molecular detection platforms are shown in Table S1. These assays target both vanA and vanB [22,26]. In addition to geneLEAD VIII, fully automated molecular detection platforms that can automate custom in-house assays include the cobas 5800/6800/8800 systems (Roche, Basel, Switzerland) and the BD MAX system (Becton Dickinson). These customizable platforms can preserve extracted nucleic acids, which can be used for further genetic investigations. Assays other than the VIASURE assay listed in Table S1 have been evaluated for their performance in the direct detection of vanA and vanB in clinical samples (rectal swab or positive blood culture). The processing mode (batch or random access), testing capacity (1–96 samples) and turn-around time (1–6 h) varied among the assays. The maximum testing capacity of geneLEAD VIII (eight samples) is the lowest among the batch processing-type instruments, which is a potential limitation, although the capacity may be sufficient for most hospital laboratory settings. The running cost of the VIASURE assay is approximately €34/sample, including the costs of the controls and consumables. This is cheaper than other proprietary systems [e.g. Xpert vanA/vanB (Cepheid, Sunnyvale, CA, USA), €51/sample, and BioFire FilmArray Blood Culture Identification 2 Panel (bioMérieux, Marcy-l'Étoile, France), €121/sample]. These estimations were based on Japanese market prices, converted to euros at an exchange rate of 1€=160 yen. In a recent survey, Leber et al. reported that more than 80% of microbiology laboratories are understaffed and that these laboratories are difficult to fill for a variety of reasons [47]. However, laboratory automation can not only reduce turn-around time and increase productivity but also improve quality and reduce labour and costs [48,49]. The results of this study show that the automated VIASURE assay reduced the workload while shortening the turn-around time and enabling high-quality molecular testing.
Our study has several limitations. First, the isolates were collected only in Japan and were biassed toward regional strains. Second, the study was conducted at a single institution, limiting the generalizability of the results. Third, the performance of the VIASURE–geneLEAD combination assay for the direct detection of VRE from clinical samples was not evaluated.
In conclusion, the results of the present study suggest that the VIASURE assay using geneLEAD VIII has excellent sensitivity and specificity for the detection of VRE from bacterial suspensions. The use of this assay with geneLEAD VIII, which allows automated extraction of nucleic acids followed by real-time PCR, could have important implications for clinical laboratories and infection control due to its shorter turn-around and hands-on time compared to that of manual PCR testing.
Supplementary material
Acknowledgements
We thank Michihiro Saito (Precision System Science) for his technical assistance.
Abbreviations
- CI
confidence interval
- CLSI
Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute
- CT
cycle threshold
- MIC
minimum inhibitory concentration
- NPA
negative percentage agreement
- OPA
overall percentage agreement
- PPA
positive percentage agreement
- VRE
vancomycin-resistant enterococci
- VSE
vancomycin-sensitive enterococci
Footnotes
Funding: This research was partly supported by Precision System Science. The funding organizations had no role in the study design, data collection and interpretation or the decision to submit the work for publication.
Ethical statement: No ethical approval was required, as only bacterial isolates were analysed without clinical data.
Author contributions: Conceptualization: K.M. and Y.M.; data curation: Y.M.; formal analysis: K.M. and Y.M.; funding acquisition: Y.M. and M.N.; investigation: K.M., Y.M., Yusuke T., K.S., Yasuhiro T. and M.Y.; methodology: Y.M.; project administration: Y.M.; software: Y.M.; resources: K.M., Y.M. and M.N.; supervision: Y.M. and M.N.; validation: K.M. and Y.M.; visualization: K.M. and Y.M.; writing – original draft: K.M. and Y.M.; writing – review and editing: K.M, Y.M., Yusuke T., K.S., Yasuhiro T., M.Y. and M.N.
Contributor Information
Keiichiro Mori, Email: kei71110@kuhp.kyoto-u.ac.jp.
Yasufumi Matsumura, Email: yazblood@kuhp.kyoto-u.ac.jp.
Yusuke Tsuda, Email: tsuda_yusuke@kuhp.kyoto-u.ac.jp.
Koh Shinohara, Email: shinoharakoh@kuhp.kyoto-u.ac.jp.
Yasuhiro Tsuchido, Email: tsuchido@kuhp.kyoto-u.ac.jp.
Masaki Yamamoto, Email: masakiy@kuhp.kyoto-u.ac.jp.
Miki Nagao, Email: mnagao@kuhp.kyoto-u.ac.jp.
References
- 1.Vincent J-L, Sakr Y, Singer M, Martin-Loeches I, Machado FR, et al. Prevalence and outcomes of infection among patients in intensive care units in 2017. JAMA. 2020;323:1478–1487. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.2717. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Leclercq R. Epidemiological and resistance issues in multidrug-resistant staphylococci and enterococci. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2009;15:224–231. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2009.02739.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Lee XJ, Stewardson AJ, Worth LJ, Graves N, Wozniak TM. attributable length of stay, mortality risk, and costs of bacterial health care-associated infections in Australia: a retrospective case-cohort study. Clin Infect Dis. 2021;72:e506–e514. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa1228. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Ziakas PD, Pliakos EE, Zervou FN, Knoll BM, Rice LB, et al. MRSA and VRE colonization in solid organ transplantation: a meta-analysis of published studies. Am J Transplant. 2014;14:1887–1894. doi: 10.1111/ajt.12784. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Faron ML, Ledeboer NA, Buchan BW. Resistance mechanisms, epidemiology, and approaches to screening for vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus in the health care setting. J Clin Microbiol. 2016;54:2436–2447. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00211-16. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Antibiotic resistance threats in the United States. 2019. https://www.cdc.gov/antimicrobial-resistance/media/pdfs/2019-ar-threats-report-508.pdf
- 7.DiazGranados CA, Zimmer SM, Klein M, Jernigan JA. Comparison of mortality associated with vancomycin-resistant and vancomycin-susceptible enterococcal bloodstream infections: a meta-analysis. Clin Infect Dis. 2005;41:327–333. doi: 10.1086/430909. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Brinkwirth S, Ayobami O, Eckmanns T, Markwart R. Hospital-acquired infections caused by enterococci: a systematic review and meta-analysis, WHO European Region, 1 January 2010 to 4 February 2020. Euro Surveill. 2021;26 doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2021.26.45.2001628. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Papanicolaou GA, Ustun C, Young J-AH, Chen M, Kim S, et al. Bloodstream infection due to vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus is associated with increased mortality after hematopoietic cell transplantation for acute leukemia and myelodysplastic syndrome: a multicenter, retrospective cohort study. Clin Infect Dis. 2019;69:1771–1779. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciz031. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Puchter L, Chaberny IF, Schwab F, Vonberg RP, Bange FC, et al. Economic burden of nosocomial infections caused by vancomycin-resistant enterococci. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2018;7:1. doi: 10.1186/s13756-017-0291-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.MacDougall C, Johnstone J, Prematunge C, Adomako K, Nadolny E, et al. Economic evaluation of vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) control practices: a systematic review. J Hosp Infect. 2020;105:53–63. doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2019.12.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Mac S, Fitzpatrick T, Johnstone J, Sander B. Vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) screening and isolation in the general medicine ward: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2019;8:168. doi: 10.1186/s13756-019-0628-x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Sugai M, Yuasa A, Miller RL, Vasilopoulos V, Kurosu H, et al. An economic evaluation estimating the clinical and economic burden of increased vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium Infection Incidence in Japan. Infect Dis Ther. 2023;12:1695–1713. doi: 10.1007/s40121-023-00826-w. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Werner G, Coque TM, Hammerum AM, Hope R, Hryniewicz W, et al. Emergence and spread of vancomycin resistance among enterococci in Europe. Euro Surveill. 2008;13:19021959. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.García-Solache M, Rice LB. The Enterococcus: a model of adaptability to its environment. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2019;32:e00058-18. doi: 10.1128/CMR.00058-18. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Werner G, Neumann B, Weber RE, Kresken M, Wendt C, et al. Thirty years of VRE in Germany - “expect the unexpected”: the view from the National Reference Centre for Staphylococci and Enterococci. Drug Resist Updat. 2020;53:100732. doi: 10.1016/j.drup.2020.100732. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Werner G, Klare I, Fleige C, Geringer U, Witte W, et al. Vancomycin-resistant vanB-type Enterococcus faecium isolates expressing varying levels of vancomycin resistance and being highly prevalent among neonatal patients in a single ICU. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2012;1:21. doi: 10.1186/2047-2994-1-21. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Hegstad K, Giske CG, Haldorsen B, Matuschek E, Schønning K, et al. Performance of the EUCAST disk diffusion method, the CLSI agar screen method, and the Vitek 2 automated antimicrobial susceptibility testing system for detection of clinical isolates of enterococci with low- and medium-level VanB-type vancomycin resistance: a multicenter study. J Clin Microbiol. 2014;52:1582–1589. doi: 10.1128/JCM.03544-13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Klare I, Bender JK, Fleige C, Kriebel N, Hamprecht A, et al. Comparison of VITEK® 2, three different gradient strip tests and broth microdilution for detecting vanB-positive Enterococcus faecium isolates with low vancomycin MICs. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2019;74:2926–2929. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkz310. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.He YH, Ruan GJ, Hao H, Xue F, Ma YK, et al. Real-time PCR for the rapid detection of vanA, vanB and vanM genes. J Microbiol Immunol Infect. 2020;53:746–750. doi: 10.1016/j.jmii.2019.02.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Bell JM, Paton JC, Turnidge J. Emergence of vancomycin-resistant enterococci in Australia: phenotypic and genotypic characteristics of isolates. J Clin Microbiol. 1998;36:2187–2190. doi: 10.1128/JCM.36.8.2187-2190.1998. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Dalpke AH, Hofko M, Zimmermann S. Development of a real-time PCR protocol requiring minimal handling for detection of vancomycin-resistant enterococci with the fully automated BD Max system. J Clin Microbiol. 2016;54:2321–2329. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00768-16. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Giersch K, Tanida K, Both A, Nörz D, Heim D, et al. Adaptation and validation of a quantitative vanA/vanB DNA screening assay on a high-throughput PCR system. Sci Rep. 2024;14:3523. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-54037-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Zhou X, Arends JP, Kampinga GA, Ahmad HM, Dijkhuizen B, et al. Evaluation of the Xpert vanA/vanB assay using enriched inoculated broths for direct detection of vanB vancomycin-resistant enterococci. J Clin Microbiol. 2014;52:4293–4297. doi: 10.1128/JCM.01125-14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.El Sherif HM, Elsayed M, El-Ansary MR, Aboshanab KM, El Borhamy MI, et al. BioFire FilmArray BCID2 versus VITEK-2 system in determining microbial etiology and antibiotic-resistant genes of pathogens recovered from central line-associated bloodstream infections. Biology. 2022;11:1573. doi: 10.3390/biology11111573. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Tansarli GS, Chapin KC. A closer look at the laboratory impact of utilizing ePlex blood culture identification panels: a workflow analysis using rapid molecular detection for positive blood cultures. Microbiol Spectr. 2022;10:e0179622. doi: 10.1128/spectrum.01796-22. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Shirano M, Takakura S, Yamamoto M, Matsumura Y, Matsushima A, et al. Regional spread of vanA- or vanB-positive Enterococcus gallinarum in hospitals and long-term care facilities in Kyoto prefecture, Japan. Epidemiol Infect. 2011;139:430–436. doi: 10.1017/S0950268810001123. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Matsushima A, Takakura S, Yamamoto M, Matsumura Y, Shirano M, et al. Regional spread and control of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium and Enterococcus faecalis in Kyoto, Japan. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2012;31:1095–1100. doi: 10.1007/s10096-011-1412-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Clinical & Laboratory Standards Institute CLSI M100 Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing 35th edition. 2025. [4-April-2025]. https://em100.edaptivedocs.net/Login.aspx?ru=1 accessed.
- 30.Kariyama R, Mitsuhata R, Chow JW, Clewell DB, Kumon H. Simple and reliable multiplex PCR assay for surveillance isolates of vancomycin-resistant enterococci. J Clin Microbiol. 2000;38:3092–3095. doi: 10.1128/JCM.38.8.3092-3095.2000. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control Surveillance of antimicrobial resistance in Europe, 2023 - 2021 data. [20-December-2024];2023 https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/Antimicrobial%20resistance%20surveillance%20in%20Europe%202023%20-%202021%20data.pdf accessed.
- 32.Japan Nosocomial Infections Surveillance Annual Open Report. [20-December-2024];2023 https://janis.mhlw.go.jp/english/report/index.html accessed.
- 33.Molton JS, Tambyah PA, Ang BSP, Ling ML, Fisher DA. The global spread of healthcare-associated multidrug-resistant bacteria: a perspective from Asia. Clin Infect Dis. 2013;56:1310–1318. doi: 10.1093/cid/cit020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Panesso D, Reyes J, Rincón S, Díaz L, Galloway-Peña J, et al. Molecular epidemiology of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium: a prospective, multicenter study in South American hospitals. J Clin Microbiol. 2010;48:1562–1569. doi: 10.1128/JCM.02526-09. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Lee T, Pang S, Abraham S, Coombs GW. Antimicrobial-resistant CC17 Enterococcus faecium: the past, the present and the future. J Glob Antimicrob Resist. 2019;16:36–47. doi: 10.1016/j.jgar.2018.08.016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Yan MY, He YH, Ruan GJ, Xue F, Zheng B, et al. The prevalence and molecular epidemiology of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) carriage in patients admitted to intensive care units in Beijing, China. J Microbiol Immunol Infect. 2023;56:351–357. doi: 10.1016/j.jmii.2022.07.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Shen H, Zhang Q, Li S, Huang T, Ma W, et al. Surveillance and characteristics of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus isolates in a Chinese tertiary hospital in Shenzhen, 2018 to 2024. J Glob Antimicrob Resist. 2025;40:29–33. doi: 10.1016/j.jgar.2024.11.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Kent AG, Spicer LM, Campbell D, Breaker E, McAllister GA, et al. Sentinel Surveillance reveals phylogenetic diversity and detection of linear plasmids harboring vanA and optrA among enterococci collected in the United States. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2024;68:e0059124. doi: 10.1128/aac.00591-24. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Hammerum AM, Karstensen KT, Roer L, Kaya H, Lindegaard M, et al. Surveillance of vancomycin-resistant enterococci reveals shift in dominating clusters from vanA to vanB Enterococcus faecium clusters, Denmark, 2015 to 2022. Euro Surveill. 2024;29:2300633. doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2024.29.23.2300633. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Cimen C, Berends MS, Bathoorn E, Lokate M, Voss A, et al. Vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) in hospital settings across European borders: a scoping review comparing the epidemiology in the Netherlands and Germany. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2023;12:78. doi: 10.1186/s13756-023-01278-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Lee RS, Gonçalves da Silva A, Baines SL, Strachan J, Ballard S, et al. The changing landscape of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium in Australia: a population-level genomic study. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2018;73:3268–3278. doi: 10.1093/jac/dky331. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Fujiya Y, Harada T, Sugawara Y, Akeda Y, Yasuda M, et al. Transmission dynamics of a linear vanA-plasmid during a nosocomial multiclonal outbreak of vancomycin-resistant enterococci in a non-endemic area, Japan. Sci Rep. 2021;11:14780. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-94213-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Saito N, Kitazawa J, Horiuchi H, Yamamoto T, Kimura M, et al. Interhospital transmission of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium in Aomori, Japan. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2022;11:99. doi: 10.1186/s13756-022-01136-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Kitagawa D, Komatsu M, Nakamura A, Suzuki S, Oka M, et al. Nosocomial infections caused by vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus in a Japanese general hospital and molecular genetic analysis. J Infect Chemother. 2021;27:1689–1693. doi: 10.1016/j.jiac.2021.08.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Papagiannitsis CC, Malli E, Florou Z, Medvecky M, Sarrou S, et al. First description in Europe of the emergence of Enterococcus faecium ST117 carrying both vanA and vanB genes, isolated in Greece. J Glob Antimicrob Resist. 2017;11:68–70. doi: 10.1016/j.jgar.2017.07.010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Santona A, Taviani E, Hoang HM, Fiamma M, Deligios M, et al. Emergence of unusual vanA/vanB2 genotype in a highly mutated vanB2-vancomycin-resistant hospital-associated E. faecium background in Vietnam. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2018;52:586–592. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2018.07.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Leber AL, Peterson E, Dien Bard J, Personnel Standards and Workforce Subcommittee, American Society for Microbiology The hidden crisis in the times of COVID-19: critical shortages of medical laboratory professionals in clinical microbiology. J Clin Microbiol. 2022;60:e0024122. doi: 10.1128/jcm.00241-22. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Trigueiro G, Oliveira C, Rodrigues A, Seabra S, Pinto R, et al. Conversion of a classical microbiology laboratory to a total automation laboratory enhanced by the application of lean principles. Microbiol Spectr. 2024;12:e0215323. doi: 10.1128/spectrum.02153-23. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Thomson RB, Jr, McElvania E. Total laboratory automation: what is gained, what is lost, and who can afford it? Clin Lab Med. 2019;39:371–389. doi: 10.1016/j.cll.2019.05.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.