ArticleBMC medical genomics2024
Investigation of in vitro susceptibility and resistance mechanisms to amikacin among diverse carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae.
Article in BMC medical genomics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Whole-genome sequencing analysis of clinical carbapenemase-producing bacteria isolated in Dakar, Senegal.Microbiology spectrum · 2026Article
- Targeting carbapenem-resistant and hypervirulent Klebsiella pneumoniae: in vitro evaluation of cefepime/zidebactam, aztreonam/avibactam, imipenem/relebactam, and meropenem/vaborbactam.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Whole-genome sequencing reveals the genomic characterization and evolution of carbapenem-resistantFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- Seven-Year Surveillance and AI-Based Forecasting of Antimicrobial Resistance in PediatricInfection and drug resistance · 2026Article
- Analysis of Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacterales Resistance in a Hospital in Kunming Over the Past Two Years.Infection and drug resistance · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to assess the in vitro drug susceptibility of various Carbapenemase-Producing Enterobacteriaceae (CPE) genotypes and elucidate the underlying mechanisms of amikacin resistance.
methodsA total of 72 unique CPE strains were collected from the Second Hospital of Jiaxing between 2019 and 2022, including 51 strains of Klebsiella pneumoniae, 11 strains of Escherichia coli, 6 strains of Enterobacter cloacae, 2 strains of Klebsiella aerogenes, 1 strain of Citrobacter freundii, and 1strain of Citrobacter werkmanii. Among these strains, 24 carried bla
resultsOut of the 72 CPE strains tested, 41.7% exhibited resistance to amikacin. The drug resistance rates for K. pneumoniae, E. coli, and Enterobacter spp. were 51.0%, 27.3%, and 10.0%, respectively. The majority of the CPE strains (> 90%) displayed resistance to cephalosporins and carbapenems, while most of them were sensitive to polymyxin B and tigecycline (97.2% and 94.4%). The amikacin resistance rate was 100% for strains carrying bla
conclusionThis study identified significant amikacin resistance in CPE strains, particularly in those carrying the bla
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.