Comparison of Two Lateral Flow Immunochromatographic Assays for Rapid Detection of KPC, NDM, IMP, VIM and OXA-48 Carbapenemases in Gram-Negatives.

IF 4.2 2区 生物学 Q2 MICROBIOLOGY
Clara Morales Dominguez, Saoussen Oueslati, Nahed Al Laham, Réva Nermont, Hervé Volland, Thierry Naas
{"title":"Comparison of Two Lateral Flow Immunochromatographic Assays for Rapid Detection of KPC, NDM, IMP, VIM and OXA-48 Carbapenemases in Gram-Negatives.","authors":"Clara Morales Dominguez, Saoussen Oueslati, Nahed Al Laham, Réva Nermont, Hervé Volland, Thierry Naas","doi":"10.3390/microorganisms13092140","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The spread of carbapenemase-producing Gram-negative bacteria poses a significant clinical challenge due to their association with severe Difficult-to-Treat nosocomial infections, as available therapies are drastically reduced. Rapid and accurate detection of carbapenemase-producing Gram-negative bacteria is critical for effective patient management, guiding appropriate antibiotic therapy, and implementing infection control measures to limit their dissemination within healthcare settings. Lateral flow immunoassays that detect the five main carbapenemases have become cornerstones in the fight against carbapenemase-producing Gram-negative bacteria. Carbapenemases evolve in response to antibiotic exposure, and therefore regular evaluation of these lateral flow immunoassays is crucial. Here, we have evaluated a novel assay, the KINVO assay (Medomics Medical Technology) and compared it to the Gold Standard of LFIAs for carbapenemase detection, the NG-TEST CARBA 5 assay (NG-Biotech) on a large panel of carbapenemase variants. The comparison between the two assays highlighted that both share key advantages such as rapidity and simplicity. However, NG-Test CARBA 5 demonstrated superior performance overall, particularly in accurately detecting IMP-type carbapenemases and the OXA-48 variant OXA-505. In contrast, the KINVO assay was more effective at detecting a broader range of KPC variants, including some that have lost carbapenem-hydrolyzing activity but gained resistance to ceftazidime/avibactam. If we consider these variants no longer as carbapenemases, and thus that they should not be detected, the NG-Test CARBA 5 performed better for KPC carbapenemase detection.</p>","PeriodicalId":18667,"journal":{"name":"Microorganisms","volume":"13 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12472453/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Microorganisms","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms13092140","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The spread of carbapenemase-producing Gram-negative bacteria poses a significant clinical challenge due to their association with severe Difficult-to-Treat nosocomial infections, as available therapies are drastically reduced. Rapid and accurate detection of carbapenemase-producing Gram-negative bacteria is critical for effective patient management, guiding appropriate antibiotic therapy, and implementing infection control measures to limit their dissemination within healthcare settings. Lateral flow immunoassays that detect the five main carbapenemases have become cornerstones in the fight against carbapenemase-producing Gram-negative bacteria. Carbapenemases evolve in response to antibiotic exposure, and therefore regular evaluation of these lateral flow immunoassays is crucial. Here, we have evaluated a novel assay, the KINVO assay (Medomics Medical Technology) and compared it to the Gold Standard of LFIAs for carbapenemase detection, the NG-TEST CARBA 5 assay (NG-Biotech) on a large panel of carbapenemase variants. The comparison between the two assays highlighted that both share key advantages such as rapidity and simplicity. However, NG-Test CARBA 5 demonstrated superior performance overall, particularly in accurately detecting IMP-type carbapenemases and the OXA-48 variant OXA-505. In contrast, the KINVO assay was more effective at detecting a broader range of KPC variants, including some that have lost carbapenem-hydrolyzing activity but gained resistance to ceftazidime/avibactam. If we consider these variants no longer as carbapenemases, and thus that they should not be detected, the NG-Test CARBA 5 performed better for KPC carbapenemase detection.

两种横向流动免疫层析法快速检测革兰氏阴性细胞中KPC、NDM、IMP、VIM和OXA-48碳青霉烯酶的比较
产生碳青霉烯酶的革兰氏阴性菌的传播带来了重大的临床挑战,因为它们与严重的难以治疗的医院感染有关,因为可用的治疗方法急剧减少。快速准确地检测产生碳青霉烯酶的革兰氏阴性菌对于有效的患者管理、指导适当的抗生素治疗和实施感染控制措施以限制其在医疗保健环境中的传播至关重要。检测五种主要碳青霉烯酶的侧流免疫分析已经成为对抗产生碳青霉烯酶的革兰氏阴性菌的基础。碳青霉烯酶随着抗生素暴露而进化,因此定期评估这些侧流免疫测定是至关重要的。在这里,我们评估了一种新的检测方法,kino检测方法(Medomics Medical Technology),并将其与碳青霉烯酶检测的LFIAs金标准NG-TEST CARBA 5检测方法(NG-Biotech)在碳青霉烯酶变体上进行了比较。两种分析方法的比较突出表明,两者都具有快速和简单等关键优势。然而,NG-Test CARBA 5总体上表现出优越的性能,特别是在准确检测imp型碳青霉烯酶和OXA-48变体OXA-505方面。相比之下,kino检测在检测更广泛的KPC变体方面更有效,包括一些失去碳青霉烯水解活性但对头孢他啶/阿维巴坦产生抗性的KPC变体。如果我们认为这些变体不再是碳青霉烯酶,因此它们不应该被检测到,那么NG-Test CARBA 5在KPC碳青霉烯酶检测中表现更好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Microorganisms
Microorganisms Medicine-Microbiology (medical)
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
6.70%
发文量
2168
审稿时长
20.03 days
期刊介绍: Microorganisms (ISSN 2076-2607) is an international, peer-reviewed open access journal which provides an advanced forum for studies related to prokaryotic and eukaryotic microorganisms, viruses and prions. It publishes reviews, research papers and communications. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. The full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced. Electronic files and software regarding the full details of the calculation or experimental procedure, if unable to be published in a normal way, can be deposited as supplementary electronic material.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信