Study on carbapenemase-producing bacteria by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization approach.
Anti-Bacterial Agents
/ pharmacology
Bacteria
/ drug effects
Bacterial Proteins
/ chemistry
Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae
/ drug effects
Carbapenems
/ pharmacology
Enterobacteriaceae
/ drug effects
Microbial Sensitivity Tests
Pseudomonas aeruginosa
/ drug effects
Spectrometry, Mass, Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption-Ionization
/ methods
beta-Lactamases
/ chemistry
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
12
10
2020
accepted:
05
02
2021
entrez:
18
3
2021
pubmed:
19
3
2021
medline:
8
9
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The development of new techniques for the detection of carbapenemase activity is of great importance since the increased incident of resistance against carbapenems represents a serious threat to global public health. In this context, the matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization approach already demonstrated to be a reliable tool for rapid carbapenemase detection. As a newly developed test, there is still a lack of in-depth analysis of its robustness and possible wider application. The main goal of this study was to evaluate the potential for using the design MBT STAR-Carba assay as the pre-characterization method for Enterobacterales and P. aeruginosa strains in terms of the produced classes of carbapenemases using modified procedure parameters-various suspension densities and incubation times. Moreover, its usefulness for the in-depth analysis and characterization of metallo-β-lactamases (MBL) was tested by applying inhibition assays. In this study, the designed assay proved to be a sensitive tool for the detection of carbapenemase hydrolytic activity, which can be successfully used to partially classify the class of carbapenemase present. Additionally, the use of defined high concentration suspensions would allow to shorten the incubation time to 1 minute for certain strains. Considering that the assay was also suitable to investigate the effect of different inhibitors on the MBL activity, it demonstrates far higher discriminatory potential than only a rapid routine carbapenemase detection tool and could be used as a susceptibility assay.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33735168
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0247369
pii: PONE-D-20-32032
pmc: PMC7971901
doi:
Substances chimiques
Anti-Bacterial Agents
0
Bacterial Proteins
0
Carbapenems
0
beta-Lactamases
EC 3.5.2.6
carbapenemase
EC 3.5.2.6
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0247369Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: MP, KS, and MK are paid employees of Bruker Daltonik GmbH (Germany). There are no patents, products in development or marketed products associated with this research to declare. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.
Références
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2017 Aug 1;72(8):2259-2262
pubmed: 28444315
J Clin Microbiol. 2013 May;51(5):1589-92
pubmed: 23447631
Emerg Infect Dis. 2011 Oct;17(10):1791-8
pubmed: 22000347
Front Microbiol. 2018 Nov 23;9:2854
pubmed: 30542332
J Clin Microbiol. 2011 Sep;49(9):3222-7
pubmed: 21775535
J Glob Antimicrob Resist. 2013 Mar;1(1):7-16
pubmed: 27873609
J Clin Microbiol. 2012 Apr;50(4):1140-6
pubmed: 22259207
Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob. 2016 Feb 02;15:5
pubmed: 26839024
Lett Appl Microbiol. 2014 Apr;58(4):325-9
pubmed: 24286119
J Microbiol Methods. 2018 Feb;145:66-68
pubmed: 29307737
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2013 Nov;77(3):200-1
pubmed: 24041554
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2015 May;70(5):1338-42
pubmed: 25630646
Genes Dis. 2019 Apr 17;6(2):109-119
pubmed: 31194018
J R Soc Med. 2002;95 Suppl 41:22-6
pubmed: 12216271
J Clin Microbiol. 2016 Mar;54(3):754-9
pubmed: 26677247
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2018 Jan;37(1):149-155
pubmed: 28980084
Nat Rev Microbiol. 2019 May;17(5):295-306
pubmed: 30837684
Front Microbiol. 2019 Jun 20;10:1413
pubmed: 31281303
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2016 Oct;71(10):2856-67
pubmed: 27287232
J Microbiol Methods. 2015 Apr;111:21-3
pubmed: 25644285
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2017 Feb;87(2):129-132
pubmed: 27863949
J Clin Microbiol. 2018 Jul 26;56(8):
pubmed: 29769274
J Clin Microbiol. 2018 Oct 25;56(11):
pubmed: 30158194
J Clin Microbiol. 2013 Jan;51(1):287-90
pubmed: 23100344
Euro Surveill. 2019 Jan;24(4):
pubmed: 30696525
J Clin Microbiol. 2012 Mar;50(3):927-37
pubmed: 22205812
J Glob Infect Dis. 2016 Jan-Mar;8(1):41-50
pubmed: 27013843
Euro Surveill. 2015;20(45):
pubmed: 26675038
J Clin Microbiol. 2017 Aug;55(8):2321-2333
pubmed: 28381609
Front Microbiol. 2020 Feb 28;11:328
pubmed: 32184776
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2017 Jun 1;72(6):1646-1658
pubmed: 28333363
Emerg Infect Dis. 2012 Sep;18(9):1503-7
pubmed: 22932472
BMC Microbiol. 2014 Apr 10;14:89
pubmed: 24720586
Environ Microbiol Rep. 2010 Jun;2(3):419-25
pubmed: 23766115
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2017 Mar;87(3):258-260
pubmed: 27939285
J Clin Microbiol. 2015 Jul;53(7):2163-71
pubmed: 25926485
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2018 Sep 1;73(9):2352-2359
pubmed: 29897463
J Clin Microbiol. 2011 Sep;49(9):3321-4
pubmed: 21795515
Expert Rev Proteomics. 2016 Oct;13(10):965-977
pubmed: 27598407
Microb Drug Resist. 2020 Nov;26(11):1298-1306
pubmed: 32412820
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2013 Sep;57(9):4578-80
pubmed: 23817380
Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2015 Jun;45(6):568-85
pubmed: 25857949
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2014 Aug;69(8):2132-6
pubmed: 24722840
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2012 May;18(5):413-31
pubmed: 22507109