ArticleAnnals of laboratory medicine2017
Evaluation of Six Phenotypic Methods for the Detection of Carbapenemases in Gram-Negative Bacteria With Characterized Resistance Mechanisms.
Article in Annals of laboratory medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of carbapenem inactivation method-based phenotypic assays for the detection of GES-type carbapenemases in Enterobacterales,Journal of clinical microbiology · 2026Article
- Thermal optimized PCR coupled to CRISPR-Cas12a for rapid detection of blaOXA-1 resistance gene.PloS one · 2026Article
- Detection of blaJournal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2025Article
- The Risk Factors of Carbapenem-ResistantInfection and drug resistance · 2022Article
- Comparison of Different Phenotypic Tests versus PCR in the Detection of Carbapenemase-ProducingInternational journal of microbiology · 2021Article
- Multicenter Evaluation of the BD Phoenix CPO Detect Test for Detection and Classification of Carbapenemase-Producing Organisms in Clinical Isolates.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2020Article
- Evaluation of Modified Rapid Carbapenem Inactivation Method (mrCIM) Combined with Rapid EDTA-Modified Carbapenem Inactivation Method (reCIM) to Detect Carbapenemase and Distinguish Metallo-Carbapenemase inInfection and drug resistance · 2020Article
- Phenotypic and genotypic detection of metallo-beta-lactamases in Carbapenem resistant Acinetobacter baumannii.Caspian journal of internal medicine · 2020Article
- Application Value of Triton X-100 to Modified Hodge Test and Carbapenem Inactivation Method in the Detection ofInfection and drug resistance · 2020Article
- The Novel CarbaLux Test for Carbapenemases and Carbapenem Deactivating AmpC Beta-Lactamases.Frontiers in microbiology · 2020Article
- The Rapid Carbapenemase Detection Method (rCDM) for Rapid and Accurate Detection of Carbapenemase-ProducingFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2019Article
- New Delhi metallo-β-lactamase-producingInfection and drug resistance · 2019Article
- Phenotypic Detection of Carbapenemase-Producing Organisms from Clinical Isolates.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2018Review
- Multicenter Evaluation of the Modified Carbapenem Inactivation Method and the Carba NP for Detection of Carbapenemase-Producing Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Acinetobacter baumannii.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2018Article
- The threat of carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacteria in a Middle East region.Infection and drug resistance · 2018Review
- Evaluation of Modified Hodge Test as a Non-molecular Assay for Accurate Detection of KPC-producingPolish journal of microbiologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe compared the performance of the modified Hodge test (MHT), Triton Hodge test (THT), Carba NP test (CNPt), simplified Carba NP test (CNPt-direct), blue-Carba NP test (BCT), and carbapenem inactivation method (CIM) for rapid and accurate carbapenemase detection.
methodsThe methods were evaluated by using 256 gram-negative isolates, including 197 Enterobacteriaceae (79 Enterobacter spp., 74 Klebsiella spp., 33 Escherichia coli, 10 Citrobacter spp., and 1 Serratia marcescens), 51 Acinetobacter baumannii, and 8 Pseudomonas aeruginosa strains. The collection included 117 non-carbapenemase, 18 Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemases (KPC) producers, 46 New Delhi metallo-β-lactamases (NDM) producers, 11 imipenemases (IMP) producers, and 51 oxacillinases (OXA) producers, and 13 strains harboring two different carbapenemase genes.
resultsThe specificity of the THT (91.5%) was significantly lower than other methods, each of which had 100% specificity (P<0.003). This can be attributed to the false detection of Ampler class C β-lactamases (AmpC) carriers. The CNPt-direct and CIM yielded the highest sensitivities (P<0.003), which were comparable (92.8% vs 93.5%, P>0.999). Because of improved detection of NDM carriers, THT showed significantly higher sensitivity than the MHT (84.9% vs 75.5%, P<0.001). However, poor performances in detecting OXA still influenced the sensitivities of the CNPt (66.2%) and BCT (82.0%), as well as the MHT and THT.
conclusionsCNPt-direct and CIM demonstrated the best performance for the efficient detection of carbapenemase among the six evaluated methods. Except the MHT and THT, the detection of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae by all the other methods was acceptable, when the OXA-type carbapenemase was not prevalent.
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.