ArticleAnnals of laboratory medicine2020
Evaluation of Xpert Carba-R Assay v.2 to Detect Carbapenemase Genes in Two Hospitals in Korea.
Article in Annals of laboratory medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rapid Identification of Carbapenemase Genes Directly from Blood Culture Samples.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Accuracy of Xpert Carba-R Assay for the Diagnosis of Carbapenemase-producing Organisms from Rectal Swabs in Asia: a Diagnostic Meta-analysis.Indian journal of microbiology · 2024Article
- Performance comparison of BD Phoenix CPO detect panel with Cepheid Xpert Carba-R assay for the detection of carbapenemase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates.BMC microbiology · 2024Article
- Direct Detection of KPC Peak from Positive Blood Cultures Using MALDI-TOF MS: Are We There Yet?Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Early appropriate diagnostics and treatment of MDR Gram-negative infections.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2022Review
- Comparison of the Clinical Outcomes of Patients With Positive Xpert Carba-R Tests for Carbapenemase-Producing Enterobacterales According to Culture Positivity.Open forum infectious diseases · 2022Article
- Evaluation of Allplex™ Entero-DR assay for detection of antimicrobial resistance determinants from bacterial cultures.BMC research notes · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAs the spread of carbapenemase-producing
methodsUsing the results of 5,479 consecutive clinical rectal swabs, discrepant analysis (enriched culture followed by PCR) was performed for all discordant samples (N=100), which were Carba-R v.2-positive and culture-negative.
resultsAmong the samples, 206 carbapenemase genes (3.6%) were detected by Carba-R v.2. The sensitivity and specificity were 95.0% and 98.1%, respectively. The positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were 49.0% and 99.9%, respectively. Following discrepant analysis, the PPV increased to 73.5% and the low PPV (8.1%) of the 86 non-KPC improved to 48.8%. Among the 105 discrepancies, NDM was the most frequently observed (N=56), followed by KPC (N=26), VIM (N=10), IMP (N=8), OXA-48 (N=5). The threshold cycle values between discordant vs. concordant and resolved groups were significantly different (
conclusionsCarba-R v.2 is a rapid and sensitive method for detecting carbapenemase-encoding genes compared with culture-based conventional PCR. Most of our discrepant results were non-KPC genes. Thus, the clinical significance of the non-KPC positive cases detected by Carba-R v.2 should be investigated. This assay would be useful for deciding whether to isolate pre-exposed patients in hospital settings, based on the high specificity and NPV.
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.