Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34587902›Full record

ArticleBMC microbiology2021

Application of a multiplex immunochromatographic assay for rapid identification of carbapenemases in a clinical microbiology laboratory: performance and turn-around-time evaluation of NG-test Carba 5.

Jung Yoon, Chang Hyun Kim, Soo-Young Yoon, Chae Seung Lim, Chang Kyu Lee

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC microbiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. TheMicrobiology spectrum · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Rapid Detection ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2021
    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

5 authors.

Jung YoonDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Korea University College of Medicine, 126-1, Anam-dong 5-ga, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, 02841, Republic of Korea.
Chang Hyun KimDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Korea University Medical Center (KUMC), Guro Hospital, Seoul, South Korea.
Soo-Young YoonDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Korea University College of Medicine, 126-1, Anam-dong 5-ga, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, 02841, Republic of Korea.
Chae Seung LimDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Korea University College of Medicine, 126-1, Anam-dong 5-ga, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, 02841, Republic of Korea.
Chang Kyu LeeDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Korea University College of Medicine, 126-1, Anam-dong 5-ga, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, 02841, Republic of Korea. cklee@korea.ac.kr.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrompt and accurate identification of carbapenemase production is essential for appropriate treatment and infection control. NG-Test Carba 5 (termed herein "Carba 5"; NG Biotech, Guipry, France) is a multiplex immunochromatographic assay for the rapid phenotypic identification of five major carbapenemases (KPC, NDM, VIM, IMP, and OXA-48-like) from bacterial isolates. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of Carba 5 and its impact on the turn-around-time in a clinical microbiology laboratory.

resultsCarba 5 was retrospectively evaluated using 78 carbapenemase producers and 23 non-carbapenemase producers confirmed by PCR and sequencing. The performance and time required for carbapenemase identification were prospectively evaluated using 47 carbapenem resistant Enterobacteriaceae isolates, and the results were compared to those obtained using Xpert Carba-R (Cepheid, Sunnyvale, CA, USA). For the bacterial isolates included in retrospective and prospective evaluation, the Carba 5 assay correctly identified 147 isolates except one isolate with a sensitivity of 99.13% (95% CI 95.25-99.98%) and specificity of 100% (95% CI 89.42-100%). The Carba 5 assay missed one VIM-1 among 13 VIM producers. The assay showed a sensitivity of 92.31% (95% CI 63.97-99.81%) for detecting VIM and 100% for detecting KPC, NDM, OXA-48-like, and IMP. Compared to the Xpert Carba-R assay, Carba 5 exhibited 100% agreement and was more time-efficient (median time 24 min vs. 1 h 11 min).

conclusionsThe Carba 5 assay has potential as an alternative to molecular methods for detecting major carbapenemases from bacterial isolates in a clinical microbiology laboratory. Compared to the Xpert Carba-R, Carba 5 turns out to be more affordable and time-efficient while showing a comparable performance, and may accelerate therapeutic and infection control decisions.

Indexed as

ImmunoassayBacteriaBacterial Proteinsbeta-LactamasesClinical Laboratory TechniquesSensitivity and SpecificityTime FactorsBacterial Proteinsbeta-LactamasescarbapenemaseCarbapenemaseMicrobiology laboratoryNG-test Carba 5Turn-around-timeXpert Carba-R

Identifiers

PMID34587902
PMCPMC8482613

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.