Abstract
Timely detection of carbapenemases by both phenotypic and genotypic methods is essential for developing strategies to control the spread of infections by carbapenem-resistant isolates and related morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of a commercial kit, the RAPIDEC® CARBA NP, and an in-house technique, the carbapenem inactivation method (CIM), against a panel of 136 carbapenemase- and noncarbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae, Acinetobacter baumannii, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates. RAPIDEC CARBA NP displayed 99% sensitivity and 100% specificity, whereas the sensitivity and specificity were 78% and 100% for the CIM test, respectively. A slight modification of the CIM test, a prolonged incubation time of 4 hours instead of two, increased the sensitivity of the test to 90% by diminishing false negativity particularly for A. baumannii. In conclusion, both tests possess a high performance and are practical for the detection of carbapenemases. Although RAPIDEC CARBA NP is a more rapid and reliable method, the CIM test may represent a useful tool for microbiology laboratories due to its simplicity and availability at any laboratory with low cost.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.