ArticleArchives of microbiology2021
Evaluation of high-concentration EDTA-modified carbapenemase inactivation method (eCIM) for SPM-producing Pseudomonas aeruginosa.
Article in Archives of microbiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Laboratory detection of carbapenemases among Gram-negative organisms.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2024Review
- Reliability of a Screening Method Using Antibiotic Disks to Detect Carbapenemases in Glucose-Nonfermenting Gram-Negative Microorganisms From Clinical Samples of a Regional Hospital in Southeastern Spain.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2024Article
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The modified carbapenemase inactivation method (mCIM) and EDTA-modified carbapenemase inactivation method (eCIM) are simple and cost-effective detection methods used for serine- and metallo-carbapenemase determination; however, poor test performance has been reported for IMP- and SPM-producing P. aeruginosa. Recently, we reported that 40 µM EDTA concentrations improved test sensitivity for IMP-producing P. aeruginosa. Herein, we assessed standard and high-concentration EDTA eCIM against SPM-producing P. aeruginosa. Twenty-four SPM-producing P. aeruginosa were evaluated, and 3 well-characterized P. aeruginosa (wild type, n = 1; KPC, n = 1; and VIM, n = 1) were used for quality control. mCIM was conducted as described by the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Concurrently, eCIM methods were performed at standard (5 µM) and high (40 µM) EDTA concentrations. All mCIM phenotypes responded concordant with its genotype. eCIM phenotype matched its genotype for 3 and 24 SPM-producing isolates using standard and high EDTA concentrations, respectively. The eCIM sensitivity increased from 12% using standard concentrations to 100% using high EDTA concentrations. No EDTA-related adverse effects were observed on bacteria growth. The combination mCIM with 40 µM EDTA eCIM properly captured SPM-producing P. aeruginosa. This methodology should be validated in a multi-center study with various enzymatic-producing P. aeruginosa.
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.