2021
DOI: 10.1128/spectrum.00954-21
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of Four Carbapenemase Detection Methods for bla KPC-2 Variants

Abstract: Rural communities often rely on groundwater for potable water supply. In this study, untreated groundwater samples from 28 shallow groundwater wells in Finland (<10 m deep and mostly supplying untreated groundwater to <200 users in rural areas) were assessed for physicochemical water quality, stable water isotopes, microbial water quality indicators, host-specific microbial source tracking (MST) markers, and bacterial community composition, activity, and diversity (using amplicon sequenci… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In Mexico, Garza Garcia et al reported the distribution of carbapenem-encoding genes in Enterobacterales: the most frequently detected were bla NDM-1 (81.5%) followed by bla OXA-48 [17]. We found carbapenem-encoding genes such as bla NDM-1 , bla NDM-5 , bla KPC-2 , bla KPC3 , bla OXA-181 , bla OXA-232 , and bla VIM-2 , but as we know bla KPC-82 and bla VIM-67 have not been previously described in Enterobacterales with NG-Test CARBA 5 ® [31][32][33][34][35].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 56%
“…In Mexico, Garza Garcia et al reported the distribution of carbapenem-encoding genes in Enterobacterales: the most frequently detected were bla NDM-1 (81.5%) followed by bla OXA-48 [17]. We found carbapenem-encoding genes such as bla NDM-1 , bla NDM-5 , bla KPC-2 , bla KPC3 , bla OXA-181 , bla OXA-232 , and bla VIM-2 , but as we know bla KPC-82 and bla VIM-67 have not been previously described in Enterobacterales with NG-Test CARBA 5 ® [31][32][33][34][35].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 56%
“…Problems arose in the clinical detection of these novel KPC variants owing to their inconspicuous resistant characteristic of carbapenems and lack of routine ceftazidime-avibactam susceptibility testing. Routine detection methods of carbapenemase-like modified carbapenem inactivation method (mCIM)/EDTA-modified CIM (eCIM) recommended by CLSI and 3-aminophenylboronic acid (APB) or EDTA synergy test show negative results for these isolates, whereas the detection results of GeneXpert Carba-R are all positive, suggesting an indeterminate KPC allele, which is often speculated as KPC-2 type in China ( 39 41 ). All test results might lead to incorrect prediction of ceftazidime-avibactam susceptibility, resulting in incorrect clinical usage.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nine of these isolates were previously investigated by DNA sequencing revealing mutations in bla KPC associated with ceftazidime/avibactam resistance (substitution D179Y, n = 8; duplication EL167–168, n = 1) [ 23 , 24 , 25 ]. KPC variants conferring ceftazidime/avibactam resistance are an increasing concern as characterized to be undetectable by the main phenotypic carbapenemase detection methods including immunochromatographic assays [ 23 , 24 , 26 ]. Since phenotypic assays represent the most used and cost-saving method to identify carbapenemase producers in clinical microbiology laboratories, failure to recognize these mutated-KPC-producing strains could facilitate their spread in hospital setting [ 22 , 27 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%