Abstract

Objective: Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae are reported increasingly everywhere throughout the world. Rapid and simple detection of carbapenemase-producing strains has become imperative because of the use of carbapenems in the treatment of extended spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing  Enterobacteriaceae infections. In this study, we aimed to compare the diagnostic value of modified Hodge test and carbapenem inactivation test for Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates producing carbapenemase, verified by molecular method, and to evaluate their use in routine laboratory practice.

 

Methods: 64 K. pneumoniae strains which have shown resistance gene causing carbapenem resistance by the polymerase chain reaction, and 40 ESBL-negative and carbapenem-susceptible K. pneumoniae strains have been included in this study. Meropenem, imipenem and ertapenem were studied separately in modified Hodge test and carbapenem inactivation test was performed for all strains. Carbapenem inactivation test was evaluated at the 6th hour for preliminary decision and at the 24th hour for the final decision.

 

Results: The sensitivity of the modified Hodge test using meropenem, imipenem and ertapenem for detecting presence of carbapenemase was 60.9%, 62.5% and 68.8%, respectively. In the carbapenem inactivation test with meropenem, imipenem and ertapenem, sensitivity to determine carbapenemase production was 32.8%, 75% and 96.9% after 6 hours, and 64.1%, 84.4% and 96.9% after 24 hours, respectively. There were no positive results in modified Hodge and carbapenem inactivation tests with K. pneumoniae strains that were ESBL-negative and carbapenem-susceptible.

 

Conclusions: As a result, molecular tests are essential to detect carbapenem encoding genes. However, we believe that the carbapenemase inactivation test is a better alternative to the modified Hodge test to detect carbapenemase production in laboratories without adequate infrastructure.Klimik Dergisi 2018; 31(3): 223-6.

 

Cite this article as: Davarcı İ, Koçoğlu ME, Zengin F. [Comparison of carbapenem inactivation test and modified Hodge test in carbapenemase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae strains]. Klimik Derg. 2018; 31(3): 223-6. Turkish.

Volume 37, Issue 1 Volume 36, Issue 4 Volume 36, Supplement 1 Volume 36, Issue 3 Volume 36, Issue 2 Volume 36, Issue 1 Volume 35, Issue 4 Volume 35, Issue 3 Volume 35, Issue 2 Volume 35, Issue 1 Volume 34, Issue 3 Volume 34, Issue 2 Volume 34, Issue 1 Volume 33, Issue 3 Volume 33, Issue 2 Volume 33, Issue 1 Volume 32, Issue 3 Volume 32, Supplement 1 Volume 32, Supplement 2 Volume 32, Issue 2 Volume 32, Issue 1 Volume 31, Issue 3 Volume 31, Issue 2 Volume 31, Supplement 1 Volume 31, Issue 1 Volume 30, Issue 3 Volume 30, Issue 2 Volume 30, Supplement 1 Volume 30, Issue 1 Volume 29, Issue 3 Volume 29, Issue 2 Volume 29, Issue 1 Volume 28, Supplement 1 Volume 28, Issue 3 Volume 28, Issue 2 Volume 28, Issue 1 Volume 27, Supplement 1 Volume 27, Issue 3 Volume 27, Issue 2 Volume 27, Issue 1 Volume 26, Issue 3 Volume 26, Supplement 1 Volume 26, Issue 2 Volume 26, Issue 1 Volume 25, Issue 3 Volume 25, Issue 2 Volume 25, Issue 1 Volume 24, Issue 3 Volume 24, Issue 2 Volume 24, Issue 1 Volume 23, Issue 3 Volume 23, Issue 2 Volume 23, Issue 1 Volume 22, Issue 3 Volume 22, Issue 2 Volume 22, Issue 1 Volume 21, Issue 3 Volume 21, Supplement 2 Volume 21, Supplement 1 Volume 21, Issue 2 Volume 21, Issue 1 Volume 20, Issue 3 Volume 20, Supplement 2 Volume 20, Issue 2 Volume 20, Issue 1 Volume 20, Supplement 1 Volume 19, Issue 3 Volume 19, Issue 2 Volume 19, Issue 1 Volume 18, Issue 3 Volume 18, Supplement 1 Volume 18, Issue 2 Volume 18, Issue 1 Volume 17, Issue 3 Volume 17, Issue 2 Volume 17, Issue 1 Volume 16, Issue 3 Volume 16, Issue 2 Volume 16, Issue 1 Volume 1, Supplement 1 Volume 15, Issue 3 Volume 15, Issue 2 Volume 15, Issue 1 Volume 14, Issue 3 Volume 14, Issue 2 Volume 14, Issue 1 Volume 13, Issue 3 Volume 13, Issue 2 Volume 13, Supplement 1 Volume 13, Issue 1 Volume 12, Issue 3 Volume 12, Issue 2 Volume 12, Issue 1 Volume 11, Issue 3 Volume 11, Issue 2 Volume 11, Supplement 1 Volume 11, Issue 1 Volume 10, Issue 3 Volume 10, Issue 2 Volume 10, Issue 1 Volume 9, Issue 3 Volume 9, Issue 2 Volume 9, Issue 1 Volume 8, Issue 3 Volume 8, Issue 2 Volume 8, Issue 1 Volume 6, Issue 3 Volume 7, Issue 1 Volume 7, Issue 2 Volume 7, Issue 3 Volume 4, Issue 3 Volume 5, Issue 1 Volume 5, Issue 2 Volume 5, Issue 3 Volume 6, Issue 1 Volume 6, Issue 2 Volume 3, Issue 1 Volume 3, Issue 2 Volume 3, Issue 3 Volume 4, Issue 1 Volume 4, Issue 2 Volume 1, Issue 2 Volume 2, Issue 1 Volume 2, Issue 2 Volume 2, Issue 3 Volume 1, Issue 1