Evaluation of the Performances of the Rapid Test RESIST-5 O.O.K.N.V Used for the Detection of Carbapenemases-Producing Enterobacterales.
Enterobacterales
carbapenemase
rapid test
Journal
Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)
ISSN: 2079-6382
Titre abrégé: Antibiotics (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101637404
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 Aug 2021
06 Aug 2021
Historique:
received:
12
07
2021
revised:
28
07
2021
accepted:
30
07
2021
entrez:
27
8
2021
pubmed:
28
8
2021
medline:
28
8
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The emergence of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales (CPE) is a public health problem, requiring rapid and reliable diagnostic methods. The aim is to compare the new rapid immunochromatographic (IC) test: RESIST-5 O.O.K.N.V with PCR and the predictive model of EUCAST algorithm for the detection of CPE. A longitudinal cross-sectional study was carried out in the bacteriology-virology laboratory of the Ibn Rochd-Casablanca University Hospital, from 1 February 2019 to 28 February 2020, concerning strains with reduced sensitivity to Ertapenem. The identification of bacterial species was carried out according to the standard criteria of microbiology and antibiogram according to CASFM-EUCAST 2019 recommendations. The sensitivity and specificity of the rapid IC test were calculated. The results of the new IC test showed a sensitivity and specificity of 100% for the detection of OXA-48 and NDM. These carbapenemases were detected simultaneously with a sensitivity and specificity of 100%. OXA-48 was the most common carbapenemas found (36%), followed by NDM (24%) and (13.4%) cases of OXA-48 and NDM coexistence. The rapid IC test could be a rapid and effective diagnostic tool for detecting the most common carbapenemases in our context, and to accelerate the implementation of adequate antibiotic therapy and infection control measures in patients with CPE infections.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The emergence of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales (CPE) is a public health problem, requiring rapid and reliable diagnostic methods. The aim is to compare the new rapid immunochromatographic (IC) test: RESIST-5 O.O.K.N.V with PCR and the predictive model of EUCAST algorithm for the detection of CPE.
METHODS
METHODS
A longitudinal cross-sectional study was carried out in the bacteriology-virology laboratory of the Ibn Rochd-Casablanca University Hospital, from 1 February 2019 to 28 February 2020, concerning strains with reduced sensitivity to Ertapenem. The identification of bacterial species was carried out according to the standard criteria of microbiology and antibiogram according to CASFM-EUCAST 2019 recommendations. The sensitivity and specificity of the rapid IC test were calculated.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The results of the new IC test showed a sensitivity and specificity of 100% for the detection of OXA-48 and NDM. These carbapenemases were detected simultaneously with a sensitivity and specificity of 100%. OXA-48 was the most common carbapenemas found (36%), followed by NDM (24%) and (13.4%) cases of OXA-48 and NDM coexistence.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The rapid IC test could be a rapid and effective diagnostic tool for detecting the most common carbapenemases in our context, and to accelerate the implementation of adequate antibiotic therapy and infection control measures in patients with CPE infections.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34439003
pii: antibiotics10080953
doi: 10.3390/antibiotics10080953
pmc: PMC8388884
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
J Clin Microbiol. 2016 Mar;54(3):529-34
pubmed: 26739152
J Clin Microbiol. 2016 Feb;54(2):471-3
pubmed: 26607983
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2019 Mar 27;63(4):
pubmed: 30617091
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2016 May;85(1):12-5
pubmed: 26971639
J Clin Microbiol. 2016 Nov;54(11):2832-2836
pubmed: 27535687
Clin Microbiol Rev. 2014 Apr;27(2):241-63
pubmed: 24696435
J Clin Microbiol. 2017 Jun;55(6):1638-1649
pubmed: 28298454
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2019 Apr 25;63(5):
pubmed: 30858212
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2016 Oct;71(10):2713-22
pubmed: 27432599
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2019 Feb;38(2):331-335
pubmed: 30448931
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2017 Jul 1;72(7):1955-1960
pubmed: 28369469
J Clin Microbiol. 2016 Jul;54(7):1700-1710
pubmed: 26912753
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2017 Jan;72(1):29-39
pubmed: 27624572
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2010 Mar;65(3):490-5
pubmed: 20071363
Clin Infect Dis. 2019 Nov 13;69(Suppl 7):S521-S528
pubmed: 31724045
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2018 Feb;24(2):133-144
pubmed: 28893689
Infect Drug Resist. 2019 Sep 23;12:3017-3027
pubmed: 31576152
J Clin Microbiol. 2017 Apr;55(4):1046-1055
pubmed: 28077701
J Clin Microbiol. 2013 Dec;51(12):4281-3
pubmed: 24108615
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2016 Jul;71(7):1834-40
pubmed: 26968882
J Clin Microbiol. 2015 Sep;53(9):3003-8
pubmed: 26085619
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2017 Aug 24;61(9):
pubmed: 28630191
J Hosp Infect. 2020 Jun;105(2):162-166
pubmed: 32304724
Front Microbiol. 2021 Jan 15;11:609856
pubmed: 33519761
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2019 Dec;1457(1):61-91
pubmed: 31469443
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2018 Oct 24;62(11):
pubmed: 30104282
J Clin Microbiol. 2017 Apr;55(4):1223-1225
pubmed: 28151407
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2016 Aug;71(8):2357-9
pubmed: 27118775
J Lab Physicians. 2017 Oct-Dec;9(4):303-307
pubmed: 28966495
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1980 May 16;289(1036):321-31
pubmed: 6109327
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2018 Feb 1;73(2):542-544
pubmed: 29165563
Ann Lab Med. 2020 May;40(3):259-263
pubmed: 31858767
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2010 Mar;54(3):969-76
pubmed: 19995920
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2016 May;71(5):1217-22
pubmed: 26825120