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.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multi Evaluation of a Modified GoldNano Carb Test for Carbapenemase Detection in Clinical Isolates of Gram-Negative Bacilli.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Phenotypic Detection of Carbapenemase Production in Carbapenem-ResistantJournal of laboratory physicians · 2021Article
- Article
- NDM Metallo-β-Lactamases and Their Bacterial Producers in Health Care Settings.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2019Review
- Rapid Detection of Carbapenemase Production in Enterobacteriaceae by Use of a Modified Paper Strip Carba NP Method.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2018Article
- Rapid and simple identification of carbapenemase genes, blaWorld journal of microbiology & biotechnology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.