Combined disk-based tests for phenotypic identification of KPC variants in Enterobacterales

IF 5 2区 医学 Q1 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Feng Yang , Li Ding , Siquan Shen , Chengkang Tang , Weiwei Yang , Qingyu Shi , Renru Han , Dandan Yin , Yan Guo , Fupin Hu
{"title":"Combined disk-based tests for phenotypic identification of KPC variants in Enterobacterales","authors":"Feng Yang ,&nbsp;Li Ding ,&nbsp;Siquan Shen ,&nbsp;Chengkang Tang ,&nbsp;Weiwei Yang ,&nbsp;Qingyu Shi ,&nbsp;Renru Han ,&nbsp;Dandan Yin ,&nbsp;Yan Guo ,&nbsp;Fupin Hu","doi":"10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2025.107663","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>The identification of <em>Klebsiella pneumoniae</em> carbapenemase (KPC) variants is challenging due to their atypical resistance profiles, especially in resource-limited settings where molecular diagnostics are not readily available.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>In this study, we developed a combination of disk-based phenotypic assays to identify KPC variant-positive Enterobacterales, including standard disk diffusion, the 3-aminophenylboronic acid (APB)/EDTA inhibition test, and the ESBL confirmatory test.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>In the disk diffusion test, all 18 KPC variant-producing strains analysed in this study were resistant to ceftazidime-avibactam and ertapenem, and 22.2 % (4 of 18) were resistant to imipenem, including those producing KPC-79, KPC-93, KPC-112, and KPC-157. For the APB/EDTA inhibition test, all strains were non-susceptible to meropenem (17 resistant and 1 intermediate) but showed no ≥5 mm increase in inhibition zone diameter with APB, EDTA, or both, thus yielding negative results according to criteria for wild-type carbapenemases. For the ESBL confirmatory test, four strains (producing KPC-79, KPC-93, KPC-112, and KPC-157) were negative, consistent with their imipenem resistance in disk diffusion, suggesting a potential phenotypic linkage. Based on these findings, two distinct disk-based phenotypic patterns of the KPC variants were identified. Both patterns shared resistance to ceftazidime-avibactam and ertapenem, along with a negative APB/EDTA inhibition result but differed in imipenem susceptibility and ESBL test results: one showed imipenem susceptibility with a positive ESBL test, whereas the other showed imipenem resistance with a negative ESBL test.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>In conclusion, this study proposes a simple disk-based approach for the phenotypic identification of KPC variants in Enterobacterales, which may aid preliminary screening in clinical laboratories and warrants further validation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":13818,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents","volume":"67 1","pages":"Article 107663"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924857925002183","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/11/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

The identification of Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC) variants is challenging due to their atypical resistance profiles, especially in resource-limited settings where molecular diagnostics are not readily available.

Methods

In this study, we developed a combination of disk-based phenotypic assays to identify KPC variant-positive Enterobacterales, including standard disk diffusion, the 3-aminophenylboronic acid (APB)/EDTA inhibition test, and the ESBL confirmatory test.

Results

In the disk diffusion test, all 18 KPC variant-producing strains analysed in this study were resistant to ceftazidime-avibactam and ertapenem, and 22.2 % (4 of 18) were resistant to imipenem, including those producing KPC-79, KPC-93, KPC-112, and KPC-157. For the APB/EDTA inhibition test, all strains were non-susceptible to meropenem (17 resistant and 1 intermediate) but showed no ≥5 mm increase in inhibition zone diameter with APB, EDTA, or both, thus yielding negative results according to criteria for wild-type carbapenemases. For the ESBL confirmatory test, four strains (producing KPC-79, KPC-93, KPC-112, and KPC-157) were negative, consistent with their imipenem resistance in disk diffusion, suggesting a potential phenotypic linkage. Based on these findings, two distinct disk-based phenotypic patterns of the KPC variants were identified. Both patterns shared resistance to ceftazidime-avibactam and ertapenem, along with a negative APB/EDTA inhibition result but differed in imipenem susceptibility and ESBL test results: one showed imipenem susceptibility with a positive ESBL test, whereas the other showed imipenem resistance with a negative ESBL test.

Conclusions

In conclusion, this study proposes a simple disk-based approach for the phenotypic identification of KPC variants in Enterobacterales, which may aid preliminary screening in clinical laboratories and warrants further validation.
肠杆菌中KPC变异表型鉴定的联合圆盘试验。
肺炎克雷伯菌碳青霉烯酶(KPC)变体的鉴定具有挑战性,因为它们的非典型耐药谱,特别是在资源有限的环境中,分子诊断不容易获得。在这项研究中,我们开发了基于磁盘的表型分析组合来鉴定KPC变异阳性肠杆菌,包括标准磁盘扩散,APB/EDTA抑制试验和ESBL验证试验。在纸片扩散试验中,本研究分析的18株KPC变异体菌株对头孢他啶-阿维巴坦和埃他培南均耐药,对亚胺培南耐药的菌株占22.2%(4/18),包括产KPC-79、KPC-93、KPC-112和KPC-157。在APB/EDTA抑制试验中,所有菌株对美罗培南不敏感(17株耐药,1株中间),但APB、EDTA或两者均未显示抑制区直径增加≥5 mm,因此根据野生型碳青霉烯酶标准为阴性。在ESBL验证试验中,4株菌株(产生KPC-79、KPC-93、KPC-112和KPC-157)呈阴性,与它们在磁盘扩散中的亚胺培南耐药性一致,提示可能存在表型连锁。基于这些发现,确定了KPC变异的两种不同的基于磁盘的表型模式。两组患者对头孢他啶-阿维巴坦和厄他培南均有耐药性,APB/EDTA抑制结果均为阴性,但亚胺培南敏感性和ESBL试验结果不同:一组患者对亚胺培南敏感,ESBL试验呈阳性,而另一组患者对亚胺培南耐药,ESBL试验呈阴性。总之,本研究提出了一种简单的基于磁盘的方法来鉴定肠杆菌中KPC变异的表型,这可能有助于临床实验室的初步筛选,值得进一步验证。
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
CiteScore
21.60
自引率
0.90%
发文量
176
审稿时长
36 days
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents is a peer-reviewed publication offering comprehensive and current reference information on the physical, pharmacological, in vitro, and clinical properties of individual antimicrobial agents, covering antiviral, antiparasitic, antibacterial, and antifungal agents. The journal not only communicates new trends and developments through authoritative review articles but also addresses the critical issue of antimicrobial resistance, both in hospital and community settings. Published content includes solicited reviews by leading experts and high-quality original research papers in the specified fields.
×
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
小红书