3%) (Table 2). The results for MgEDTA–IPM and MgEDTA–CAZ were discordant for 16 MBL producers (Table 3). There were no false positive results for MgEDTA–IPM and MgEDTA–CAZ. Two P. aeruginosa carrying VIM-2 and one E. cloacae carrying IMP-1 had negative results with MgEDTA–IPM and MgEDTA–CAZ (Table 4); they were

also negative by the SMA disk method. However, two false negative P. aeruginosa became positive when biapenem and doripenem were used with Mg-EDTA, and one false negative E. cloacae became positive when panipenem and meropenem were used as substrates. After NDM-1 Dok01 was reported, two NDM-1-producing K. pneumoniae were identified by government-instigated phosphatase inhibitor library surveillance in Japan. These isolates were collected from elderly people who had not recently traveled abroad and had had no contact with the Indian subcontinent. Although NDM-1 producers from clinical isolates are rare in Japan, accurate screening methods to detect them are needed to prevent their further transmission in both hospitals and communities. Many clinical laboratories perform confirmatory tests for MBL production against carbapenem-resistant strains [20]. The DDST using SMA is the most convenient of the phenotypic MBL detection methods. However, the growth-inhibitory zone between IPM and the SMA disks is not large enough to be classified as positive with NDM-1 Dok01 [11]. In contrast to SMA disks, DDSTs using IPM disks and Mg-EDTA, Ca-EDTA,

Co-EDTA or Cu-EDTA detected two NDM-1 producers. In addition, the DDSTs using Mg-EDTA had high sensitivity (96.0%) and specificity (100%) for 75 MBL producers and 25 non-MBL producers. Galani et al. Selleckchem Roxadustat Methisazone reported that combined disk test with CAZ and EDTA (750 µg), and DDSTs with IPM disks 10 mm away from EDTA disks have high sensitivity (97.9–100%) and specificity (91.9–96%) in Enterobacteriaceae [14]. That we obtained similar sensitivity and specificity demonstrates that Mg-EDTA can be used as a MBL inhibitor.

Several reports have indicated that AmpC β-lactamase may cause false negative results in DDSTs using SMA [20, 21]. Arakawa et al. also reported that some MBL-producing gram-negative bacilli are difficult to detect. Because they have a low level of resistance to IPM, the expansion of the zone of inhibition is inconclusive [13]. In our study, only 3 of 75 strains were false negative by both MgEDTA–CAZ and MgEDTA–IPM; these three strains were also false negative in DDSTs using SMA. Two false negative P. aeruginosa strains were resistant to six carbapenems and one false negative E. cloacae was resistant to CAZ but susceptible to six carbapenems. Carbapenem resistance in P. aeruginosa is considered to be associated with loss of OprD outer membrane proteins and/or overexpression of active efflux systems in combination with strong expression of AmpC β-lactamase [22]. Furthermore, IPM induces expression of AmpC β-lactamase in P. aeruginosa more strongly than does doripenem [23].