Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Author’ response
Author’s reply
Authors' response
Authors#x2019; response
Book Received
Book Review
Book Reviews
Centenary Review Article
Clinical Image
Clinical Images
Commentary
Communicable Diseases - Original Articles
Correspondence
Correspondence, Letter to Editor
Correspondences
Correspondences & Authors’ Responses
Corrigendum
Critique
Current Issue
Editorial
Errata
Erratum
Health Technology Innovation
IAA CONSENSUS DOCUMENT
Innovations
Letter to Editor
Malnutrition & Other Health Issues - Original Articles
Media & News
Notice of Retraction
Obituary
Original Article
Original Articles
Perspective
Perspectives
Policy
Policy Document
Policy Guidelines
Policy, Review Article
Policy: Correspondence
Policy: Editorial
Policy: Mapping Review
Policy: Original Article
Policy: Perspective
Policy: Process Paper
Policy: Scoping Review
Policy: Special Report
Policy: Systematic Review
Policy: Viewpoint
Practice
Practice: Authors’ response
Practice: Book Review
Practice: Clinical Image
Practice: Commentary
Practice: Correspondence
Practice: Letter to Editor
Practice: Obituary
Practice: Original Article
Practice: Pages From History of Medicine
Practice: Perspective
Practice: Review Article
Practice: Short Note
Practice: Short Paper
Practice: Special Report
Practice: Student IJMR
Practice: Systematic Review
Pratice, Original Article
Pratice, Review Article
Pratice, Short Paper
Programme
Programme, Correspondence, Letter to Editor
Programme: Commentary
Programme: Correspondence
Programme: Editorial
Programme: Original Article
Programme: Originial Article
Programme: Perspective
Programme: Rapid Review
Programme: Review Article
Programme: Short Paper
Programme: Special Report
Programme: Status Paper
Programme: Systematic Review
Programme: Viewpoint
Protocol
Research Correspondence
Retraction
Review Article
Short Paper
Special Opinion Paper
Special Report
Special Section Nutrition & Food Security
Status Paper
Status Report
Strategy
Student IJMR
Systematic Article
Systematic Review
Systematic Review & Meta-Analysis
Viewpoint
White Paper
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Author’ response
Author’s reply
Authors' response
Authors#x2019; response
Book Received
Book Review
Book Reviews
Centenary Review Article
Clinical Image
Clinical Images
Commentary
Communicable Diseases - Original Articles
Correspondence
Correspondence, Letter to Editor
Correspondences
Correspondences & Authors’ Responses
Corrigendum
Critique
Current Issue
Editorial
Errata
Erratum
Health Technology Innovation
IAA CONSENSUS DOCUMENT
Innovations
Letter to Editor
Malnutrition & Other Health Issues - Original Articles
Media & News
Notice of Retraction
Obituary
Original Article
Original Articles
Perspective
Perspectives
Policy
Policy Document
Policy Guidelines
Policy, Review Article
Policy: Correspondence
Policy: Editorial
Policy: Mapping Review
Policy: Original Article
Policy: Perspective
Policy: Process Paper
Policy: Scoping Review
Policy: Special Report
Policy: Systematic Review
Policy: Viewpoint
Practice
Practice: Authors’ response
Practice: Book Review
Practice: Clinical Image
Practice: Commentary
Practice: Correspondence
Practice: Letter to Editor
Practice: Obituary
Practice: Original Article
Practice: Pages From History of Medicine
Practice: Perspective
Practice: Review Article
Practice: Short Note
Practice: Short Paper
Practice: Special Report
Practice: Student IJMR
Practice: Systematic Review
Pratice, Original Article
Pratice, Review Article
Pratice, Short Paper
Programme
Programme, Correspondence, Letter to Editor
Programme: Commentary
Programme: Correspondence
Programme: Editorial
Programme: Original Article
Programme: Originial Article
Programme: Perspective
Programme: Rapid Review
Programme: Review Article
Programme: Short Paper
Programme: Special Report
Programme: Status Paper
Programme: Systematic Review
Programme: Viewpoint
Protocol
Research Correspondence
Retraction
Review Article
Short Paper
Special Opinion Paper
Special Report
Special Section Nutrition & Food Security
Status Paper
Status Report
Strategy
Student IJMR
Systematic Article
Systematic Review
Systematic Review & Meta-Analysis
Viewpoint
White Paper
View/Download PDF

Translate this page into:

Correspondence
138 (
6
); 1025-1026

Triple-disk assay for phenotypic detection of predominant Carbapenemases

P. D. Hinduja National Hospital & Medical Research Centre Lalita Girdhar building (S1 Building) 5th Floor, Microbiology Department Veer Savarkar Marg, Mahim Mumbai 400 016, India

* For correspondence: dr_crodrigues@hindujahospital.com

Licence

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Disclaimer:
This article was originally published by Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd and was migrated to Scientific Scholar after the change of Publisher.

Sir,

Carbapenems form an integral part of treatment regimen for serious and multi drug resistant Gram-negative bacterial infections. However, there are reports on increasing prevalence of carbapenem resistance in clinical isolates of Enterobacteriaceae mainly due to the production of metallo-β-carbapenemases (MBL),1 Klebsiella pneumonia carbapenemase (KPC)2 and ampC β-lactamases (AmpC)3. Thus, there arises an urgent need for establishment of a sensitive phenotypic assay that can facilitate simultaneous detection of MBL, KPC and AmpC. Recent studies have reported the use of β-lactum inhibitors coupled with meropenem disks for simple and accurate identification of carbapenemase producing organisms; for example, 3-aminophenylboronic acid (APBA), dipicolinic acid (DPA), and simultaneous use of APBA and cloxacillin (CLX) for detection of KPC, MBL and AmpC with porin loss respectively4. Thus, the purpose of this study was to determine the most predominant carbapenemase using the triple-disk assay in carbapenem resistant clinical isolates of Enterobacteriaceae.

A total of 19 consecutive meropenem resistant clinical isolates received in the Microbiology Department of P.D. Hinduja National Hospital and Research Centre, Mumbai, India, from March-July, 2010 were considered for this analysis. Meropenem resistance was determined using disk diffusion method as per the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) guidelines5. These resistant isolates were further evaluated for detection of the carbapenemases using the triple-disk assay4 : a bacterial lawn was prepared using 0.5 McFarland inoculum on Muellar-Hinton agar plates. Four disks were placed on each plate: meropenem (10 μg, Rosco Diagnostica A/S, Taastrup, Denmark), meropenem (10 μg) + APBA (600 μg), meropenem (10 μg) + DPA (1000 μg) and meropenem (10 μg) + CLX (750 μg). An increase of ±5 mm in zone diameter around disks containing β-lactamase inhibitors, as compared with the disk with meropenem alone, was considered to be a positive result for APBA, DPA and CLX.

The 19 meropenem resistant isolates represented four different bacterial populations i.e. K. pneumoniae (68.4%, n=13), Escherichia coli (15.7%, n=3), Citrobacter species (10.5%, n=2) and Enterobacter species (5.2%, n=1). The triple-disk assay revealed 94.7% (n=18) organisms to be MBL producers, of which one isolate also coproduced AmpC; and one isolate was reported negative for production of cabapenemases suggesting the existence of an alternative mechanism responsible for conferring resistance. All 18 (100%) MBL producing isolates were molecularly proven to be positive for the presence of blaNDM-1 gene (data not shown). This triple-disk assay was found to be useful in detecting carbapenemases in Enterobacteriaceae, with MBL being the most predominant mechanism of resistance. Similar findings have been reported in an another study, wherein almost 100 per cent sensitivity and specificity have been reported on the use of triple-disk assay for detection of MBL and KPC4. More importantly, different carbapenemases produced are also known to cause variable levels of resistance to carbapenems and also other non-β-lactum drugs, hence this would facilitate initiation of a further optimized treatment regimen6.

In conclusion, triple-disk assay could be considered as a simple phenotypic assay for identification of carbapenemases.

Acknowledgment

Authors thank National Health and Education Society, P. D. Hinduja National Hospital and Medical Research Centre for financial support.

References

  1. , , , , , , . Emergence of a new antibiotic resistance mechanism in India, Pakistan, and the UK: a molecular, biological, and epidemiological study. Lancet Infect Dis. 2010;10:597-602.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. , , , . The real threat of Klebsiella pneumonia carbapenemase-producing bacteria. Lancet Infect Dis. 2009;9:228-36.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. , , . Mechanisms of resistance to carbapenems in meropenem-resistant Acinetobacter isolates from clinical samples. Indian J Med Microbiol. 2007;25:121-5.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. , , , , , , . A sensitive and specific phenotypic assay for detection of metallo-β-lactamases and KPC in Klebsiella pneumoniae with the use of meropenem disks supplemented with aminophenylboronic acid, dipicolinic acid and cloxacillin. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2011;17:552-6.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing: 21 st Informational Supplement. M100-S21. Wayne, PA, USA: CLSI; .
    [Google Scholar]
  6. , , , , , , . A simple phenotypic method for the differentiation of metallo-β-lactamases and class A KPC carbapenemases in Enterobacteriaceae clinical isolates. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2010;65:1664-71.
    [Google Scholar]

    Fulltext Views
    15

    PDF downloads
    9
    View/Download PDF
    Download Citations
    BibTeX
    RIS
    Show Sections
    Scroll to Top