2011
DOI: 10.1128/jcm.02566-10
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Laboratory and Clinical Evaluation of Screening Agar Plates for Detection of Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae from Surveillance Rectal Swabs

Abstract: The increased worldwide spread of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) emphasizes the need for a sensitive screening procedure to identify these microorganisms. Gastrointestinal carriers may serve as the reservoir for cross-transmission in the health care setting, and thus active surveillance is a key part in preventing the spread of such strains. Three agar-based methods for direct CRE detection from rectal swabs were compared: CHROMagar-KPC (Chrom); MacConkey agar with imipenem at 1 g/ml (MacI); and… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

4
76
3
6

Year Published

2011
2011
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 113 publications
(89 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
4
76
3
6
Order By: Relevance
“…Even more, molecular methods do not give the possibility for further strain typing and susceptibility testing. Thus, several culture techniques for screening carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae have been tested, including methods that use in-house-prepared selective media, such as MacConkey agar or tryptic soy broth containing a 10-g carbapenem disk (3,8,19,20), or commercial chromogenic agar media, like CHROMagar KPC (HyLabs, Rehovot, Israel) (1,23,29) and chromID ESBL medium (bio-Mérieux, Marcy l'Etoile, France) (5). However, these screening methods are designed to detect carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae and not specifically CPE.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Even more, molecular methods do not give the possibility for further strain typing and susceptibility testing. Thus, several culture techniques for screening carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae have been tested, including methods that use in-house-prepared selective media, such as MacConkey agar or tryptic soy broth containing a 10-g carbapenem disk (3,8,19,20), or commercial chromogenic agar media, like CHROMagar KPC (HyLabs, Rehovot, Israel) (1,23,29) and chromID ESBL medium (bio-Mérieux, Marcy l'Etoile, France) (5). However, these screening methods are designed to detect carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae and not specifically CPE.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Adequate preventive measures and efficient screening are needed for an active surveillance to prevent outbreaks of nosocomial infections by these organisms Adler et al, 2011. The main carbapenemases identified in Enterobacteriaceae belong either to the Ambler class A (KPC-type) hydrolysing all β-lactams except cephamycins, the Ambler class B (NDM, VIM and IMP) which are zinc-dependent metallo-β-lactamases (MBL) hydrolysing all β-lactams except aztreonam, and the Ambler class D enzymes (OXA-48-like) hydrolysing carbapenems but weakly and not at all broadspectrum cephalosporins (Nordmann et al, 2011(Nordmann et al, , 2012a(Nordmann et al, , 2012b(Nordmann et al, , 2012c.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…16,17 Within our laboratory, our current CPE screening process, utilizing selective chromogenic agar (CHROMagar TM KPC, Paris, France) and GeneXpert Ò Carba-R for in-house molecular confirmation of CPE positive specimens (Cepheid, Buckinghamshire, United Kingdom), had an average turnaround time of 48/72 h from specimen arrival in the laboratory to final CPE result for the clinician. The 48/72 h delay in diagnosis was in keeping with other centers worldwide using selective cultures, [18][19][20] but was resulting in use of empiric broad-spectrum antimicrobials and an inefficient use of limited isolation facilities.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 76%