Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27263012›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of microbiology & biotechnology2016

Modification and evaluation of the Carba NP test by use of paper strip for simple and rapid detection of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae.

Arpasiri Srisrattakarn, Aroonlug Lulitanond, Chotechana Wilailuckana, Nicha Charoensri, Lumyai Wonglakorn, Sirikan Piyapatthanakul, Ampai Supajeen, Aroonwadee Chanawong

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of microbiology & biotechnology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Rapid and simple identification of carbapenemase genes, blaWorld journal of microbiology & biotechnology · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Arpasiri SrisrattakarnMedical Sciences Programme, Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, 40002, Thailand.
Aroonlug LulitanondCentre for Research and Development of Medical Diagnostic Laboratories, Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, 40002, Thailand.
Chotechana WilailuckanaCentre for Research and Development of Medical Diagnostic Laboratories, Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, 40002, Thailand.
Nicha CharoensriCentre for Research and Development of Medical Diagnostic Laboratories, Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, 40002, Thailand.
Lumyai WonglakornClinical Microbiology Unit, Srinagarind Hospital, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, 40002, Thailand.
Sirikan PiyapatthanakulClinical Microbiology Laboratory, The Queen Sirikit National Institute of Child Health, Bangkok, 10400, Thailand.
Ampai SupajeenClinical Microbiology Laboratory, Nan Hospital, Nan, 55000, Thailand.
Aroonwadee ChanawongCentre for Research and Development of Medical Diagnostic Laboratories, Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, 40002, Thailand. aroonwad@kku.ac.th.
Khon Kaen University · THQueen Sirikit National Institute of Child Health · TH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (CPE) isolates have now emerged worldwide. We therefore modified the phenotypic Carba NP test by use of a filter paper strip for easily and rapidly identifying CPE in routine laboratory. A collection of 56 CPE and carbapenemase-producing Pseudomonas spp. isolates (including 28 NDM-1, 11 IMP-14a, 1 IMP-1, 1 IMP-4, 1 IMP-9, 1 IMP-15, 4 VIM-2, 1 VIM-1, 1 IMP-14a with VIM-2, 3 OXA-48, 3 OXA-181 and 1 KPC-2 producers) and 41 non-CPE isolates (including 19 ESBL, 7 pAmpC, 3 AmpC, 9 ESBL with pAmpC and 3 non-ESBL & non-AmpC producers) as confirmed by the PCR methods were tested by the paper strip method using pharmaceutical imipenem/cilastatin as a substrate. Bacterial colonies of each isolate were applied directly on filter paper strips dropped with either imipenem-phenol red (test strip) or phenol red solution alone (control strip). The reaction was read within 5 min. This test failed to detect 3 OXA-181, 2 OXA-48 and 3 IMP-14a producers (85.7 % sensitivity), whereas no false positives were seen (100 % specificity). Further evaluation of the paper strip test in 267 CPE screening-positive isolates from three hospitals by their medical technologists showed 92.0 % sensitivity (100 % for NDM producers) and 100 % specificity compared with the PCR methods. Because of its ease, rapidness and cost effective, the paper strip test has a potential for routine CPE testing in low-resource laboratories particularly in areas with high prevalence of NDM enzymes, leading to appropriate antimicrobial therapy and infection control strategy.

Indexed as

Reagent StripsBacterial ProteinsBacteriological Techniquesbeta-LactamasesCarbapenemsCilastatinCilastatin, Imipenem Drug CombinationDrug CombinationsEnterobacteriaceaeEnterobacteriaceae InfectionsEnzyme AssaysHumansImipenemPhenotypePolymerase Chain ReactionPseudomonasBacterial Proteinsbeta-LactamasescarbapenemaseCarbapenemsCilastatinCilastatin, Imipenem Drug CombinationDrug CombinationsImipenemoxacillinaseReagent StripsCarbapenem resistanceImipenemaseKlebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemaseNew Delhi metallo-β-lactamaseOxacillinase-48Verona imipenemase

Identifiers

PMID27263012
OpenAlexW2416732543

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.