<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.2d1 20170631//EN" "JATS-journalpublishing1.dtd"> <ArticleSet> <Article> <Journal> <PublisherName>njbms</PublisherName> <JournalTitle>NJBMS</JournalTitle> <PISSN>0976-6626</PISSN> <EISSN>2455-1740</EISSN> <Volume-Issue>Volume 7, Issue 2</Volume-Issue> <PartNumber/> <IssueTopic>Multidisciplinary</IssueTopic> <IssueLanguage>English</IssueLanguage> <Season>October - December 2016</Season> <SpecialIssue>N</SpecialIssue> <SupplementaryIssue>N</SupplementaryIssue> <IssueOA>Y</IssueOA> <PubDate> <Year>-0001</Year> <Month>11</Month> <Day>30</Day> </PubDate> <ArticleType>Microbiology</ArticleType> <ArticleTitle>Comparison Of Phenotypic And Genotypic Methods For The Detection Of Imipenem Resistant Enterobacteriaceae Isolates</ArticleTitle> <SubTitle/> <ArticleLanguage>English</ArticleLanguage> <ArticleOA>Y</ArticleOA> <FirstPage>106</FirstPage> <LastPage>112</LastPage> <AuthorList> <Author> <FirstName>C.Anuradha</FirstName> <AuthorLanguage>English</AuthorLanguage> <Affiliation/> <CorrespondingAuthor>N</CorrespondingAuthor> <ORCID/> <FirstName>S</FirstName> <LastName>.Mathavi</LastName> <AuthorLanguage>English</AuthorLanguage> <Affiliation/> <CorrespondingAuthor>Y</CorrespondingAuthor> <ORCID/> <FirstName>R.Indra</FirstName> <LastName>Priyadharsini</LastName> <AuthorLanguage>English</AuthorLanguage> <Affiliation/> <CorrespondingAuthor>Y</CorrespondingAuthor> <ORCID/> <FirstName/> <AuthorLanguage>English</AuthorLanguage> <Affiliation/> <CorrespondingAuthor>Y</CorrespondingAuthor> <ORCID/> </Author> </AuthorList> <DOI/> <Abstract>INTRODUCTION : The rapid spread of metallobetalactamases (MBL) is a diagnostic challenge in clinical microbiology as there are concerns regarding the reliability of the various phenotypic detection methods.AIMS AND OBJECTIVES : To assess the efficiency of the phenotypic assays namely the combined disc test (CDT), double disc synergy test (DDST) and the MBL E test as compared to PCR for the detection of MBLs in enterobacteriaceae.MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred and four non-repetitive enterobacteriaceae isolates from clinical samples from October 2013 to September 2014 were included in the study.Isolates that showed a resistant zone ( ≤ 19 mm ) to imipenem were screened by means of combined disc test (CDT), double disc synergy test (DDST) and E test (imipenem/imipenem+EDTA E strips, Biomeriuex). Multiplex PCR was done to confirm the presence of MBLgenes.RESULTS : The study showed 49 isolates resistant to imipenem, of which 12 ( 24.48% ) were positive for MBL production by both combined and double disc methods; 37 ( 75.52% ) showed positivity by combined disc only and 12 ( 24.48% )isolates by double disc method only.Twelve isolates showed a MIC of ≥4µg/mLby E test .PCR detected genes in 11 isolates(22.4%) only.CONCLUSION : Since phenotypic methods give variable results, it is not advisable to employ a single screening criterion for carbapenemase detection.Phenotypic methods though specific, do not differentiate between chromosomal and plasmid encoded genes and hence genotypic characterization ( PCR ) should be considered.</Abstract> <AbstractLanguage>English</AbstractLanguage> <Keywords>Phenotypic methods,genotypic methods,Imipenem,Enterobacteriaceae</Keywords> <URLs> <Abstract>https://njbms.in/ubijournal-v1copy/journals/abstract.php?article_id=1969&title=Comparison Of Phenotypic And Genotypic Methods For The Detection Of Imipenem Resistant Enterobacteriaceae Isolates</Abstract> </URLs> <References> <ReferencesarticleTitle>References</ReferencesarticleTitle> <ReferencesfirstPage>16</ReferencesfirstPage> <ReferenceslastPage>19</ReferenceslastPage> <References/> </References> </Journal> </Article> </ArticleSet>