{
 "id": "epgka45f37",
 "slug": "carbapenem-inactivation-method",
 "title": "Carbapenem inactivation method",
 "updated": "2026-10-15",
 "topic_path": [
  {
   "id": "life",
   "label": "Life and health",
   "api_url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/api/v1/topics/life"
  },
  {
   "id": "life.health",
   "label": "Human health and medicine",
   "api_url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/api/v1/topics/life.health"
  },
  {
   "id": "life.health.clinical",
   "label": "Clinical assessment and procedures",
   "api_url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/api/v1/topics/life.health.clinical"
  },
  {
   "id": "life.health.clinical.clinical-diagnostics",
   "label": "Diagnosis and clinical assessment",
   "api_url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/api/v1/topics/life.health.clinical.clinical-diagnostics"
  },
  {
   "id": "life.health.clinical.clinical-diagnostics.laboratory-and-in-vitro-diagnostics",
   "label": "Laboratory and in-vitro diagnostics",
   "api_url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/api/v1/topics/life.health.clinical.clinical-diagnostics.laboratory-and-in-vitro-diagnostics"
  },
  {
   "id": "life.health.clinical.clinical-diagnostics.laboratory-and-in-vitro-diagnostics.genetic-and-genomic-testing",
   "label": "Genetic and genomic testing",
   "api_url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/api/v1/topics/life.health.clinical.clinical-diagnostics.laboratory-and-in-vitro-diagnostics.genetic-and-genomic-testing"
  }
 ],
 "geo": [
  {
   "id": "geo.nongeo.t2001.life.health.clinical.clinical-diagnostics.laboratory-and-in-vitro-diagnostics",
   "label": "Non-geographic · 2001 to 2020: Laboratory and in-vitro diagnostics",
   "api_url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/api/v1/geo/geo.nongeo.t2001.life.health.clinical.clinical-diagnostics.laboratory-and-in-vitro-diagnostics",
   "path": [
    {
     "id": "geo.nongeo",
     "label": "Non-geographic",
     "api_url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/api/v1/geo/geo.nongeo"
    },
    {
     "id": "geo.nongeo.t2001",
     "label": "Non-geographic · 2001 to 2020",
     "api_url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/api/v1/geo/geo.nongeo.t2001"
    },
    {
     "id": "geo.nongeo.t2001.life",
     "label": "Life and health",
     "api_url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/api/v1/geo/geo.nongeo.t2001.life"
    },
    {
     "id": "geo.nongeo.t2001.life.health",
     "label": "Human health and medicine",
     "api_url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/api/v1/geo/geo.nongeo.t2001.life.health"
    },
    {
     "id": "geo.nongeo.t2001.life.health.clinical",
     "label": "Clinical assessment and procedures",
     "api_url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/api/v1/geo/geo.nongeo.t2001.life.health.clinical"
    },
    {
     "id": "geo.nongeo.t2001.life.health.clinical.clinical-diagnostics",
     "label": "Diagnosis and clinical assessment",
     "api_url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/api/v1/geo/geo.nongeo.t2001.life.health.clinical.clinical-diagnostics"
    },
    {
     "id": "geo.nongeo.t2001.life.health.clinical.clinical-diagnostics.laboratory-and-in-vitro-diagnostics",
     "label": "Laboratory and in-vitro diagnostics",
     "api_url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/api/v1/geo/geo.nongeo.t2001.life.health.clinical.clinical-diagnostics.laboratory-and-in-vitro-diagnostics"
    }
   ]
  }
 ],
 "excerpt": "The carbapenem inactivation method (CIM) is a low-cost phenotypic assay that detects carbapenemase production in Gram-negative bacteria using a meropenem disk and an E. coli indicator strain.",
 "snippet": "The carbapenem inactivation method (CIM) is a low-cost phenotypic assay that detects carbapenemase production in Gram-negative bacteria using a meropenem disk and an E. coli indicator strain.",
 "node": "life.health.clinical.clinical-diagnostics.laboratory-and-in-vitro-diagnostics.genetic-and-genomic-testing",
 "markdown": "# Carbapenem inactivation method\n\nThe carbapenem inactivation method (CIM) is a phenotypic assay that detects carbapenemase production in [Gram-negative bacteria](https://www.edgepedia.org/gram-negative-bacteria) by testing whether a meropenem disk loses activity after contact with the test isolate. It answers a practical treatment and infection-control question: whether a carbapenem-resistant isolate carries a hydrolyzing carbapenemase enzyme, which drives infection-control precautions and antibiotic choices, rather than resistance from non-enzymatic mechanisms.\n\nThe method needs only reagents already present in a susceptibility-testing laboratory: culture, water or broth, a commercial meropenem or imipenem disk, and a susceptible *E. coli* indicator strain. In the original evaluation it cost €0.60 per test against €13 for the Carba NP test, with 96.6% concordance (112/116) between the two tests.<sup>[1](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0123690)</sup>\n\n| Key fact | Detail |\n|---|---|\n| What it measures | Inactivation of a carbapenem disk by carbapenemase enzymes, read as loss of growth inhibition of an *E. coli* indicator lawn<sup>[1](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0123690)</sup> |\n| Original protocol | 10 µl loopful in 400 µl water, 10 µg meropenem disk, ≥2 h at 35 °C, overnight read (6 h possible)<sup>[1](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0123690)</sup> |\n| Standardized variant (mCIM) | 1 µl organism in 2 ml tryptic soy broth, 4 h incubation; zone ≤15 mm positive, ≥19 mm negative, 16–18 mm indeterminate<sup>[2](https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.00193-17)</sup> |\n| Performance (mCIM validation) | 99% sensitivity (95% CI 93–100%), 100% specificity (95% CI 82–100%)<sup>[2](https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.00193-17)</sup> |\n| Cost | About €0.60–$1 per test, versus $2–10 for Carba NP and $55 list price for Xpert Carba-R<sup>[1](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0123690)</sup><sup> • </sup><sup>[2](https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.00193-17)</sup> |\n| Guideline status | Added to CLSI M100 (27th edition) in 2017 as a standardized method; CLSI recommends mCIM as the preferred CPE detection method<sup>[2](https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.00193-17)</sup><sup> • </sup><sup>[3](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8597650/)</sup> |\n| Main weakness | Lower sensitivity for weakly expressed enzymes (OXA-48-like, some MBLs) and rare carbapenemases; mCIM sensitivity was 60.4% for rare carbapenemases in one comparison<sup>[4](https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/spectrum.03015-23)</sup> |\n\n## How it works\n\nCarbapenemases are β-lactamase enzymes that hydrolyze carbapenem antibiotics. In the CIM, the test organism is incubated with a susceptibility-testing disk containing 10 µg of meropenem. If the isolate produces carbapenemase, the meropenem in the disk is inactivated, allowing uninhibited growth of the susceptible indicator strain; disks incubated in carbapenemase-free suspensions yield a clear inhibition zone.<sup>[1](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0123690)</sup> The disk therefore acts as a substrate aliquot, and the indicator lawn acts as the detector of residual antibiotic activity.\n\nCation content of the medium matters for two enzyme classes: class B metallo-β-lactamases require zinc at the active site, and class D enzymes are more active in their dimeric form in the presence of cations. A higher inoculum is also needed for carbapenemases with weak enzymatic activity, such as OXA-48-like enzymes.<sup>[5](https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.01509-24)</sup> These observations underlie later medium and inoculum modifications.\n\n## How it is done\n\nThe original CIM suspends a full 10 µl loop of culture from a Mueller-Hinton or blood agar plate in 400 µl water, immerses a 10 µg meropenem disk for a minimum of 2 hours at 35 °C, then places the disk on [Mueller-Hinton agar](https://www.edgepedia.org/mueller-hinton-agar) inoculated with a susceptible *E. coli* indicator strain and reads the zone after overnight incubation, or after 6 hours for same-day results.<sup>[1](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0123690)</sup>\n\nThe standardized mCIM changes several parameters: 1 µl of test organism is added to 2 ml of tryptic soy broth, vortexed 10–15 s, and a 10 µg meropenem disk is incubated in the suspension for 4 h ± 15 min at 35 °C ± 2 °C. The disk is then transferred to Mueller-Hinton agar inoculated with *E. coli* ATCC 25922 at 0.5 McFarland and incubated 18–24 h.<sup>[2](https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.00193-17)</sup> Zones of ≤15 mm are positive, ≥19 mm negative, and 16–18 mm indeterminate; a narrow ring of carryover growth abutting the disk is ignored.<sup>[2](https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.00193-17)</sup>\n\nMeropenem is the preferred substrate. In a retrospective study of 93 well-characterized isolates, CIM sensitivity/specificity were 92.1%/100% with meropenem disks, 81.1%/100% with ertapenem, and 100%/65.6% with imipenem.<sup>[6](https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0170769)</sup>\n\n## Origin\n\nThe CIM was introduced by Kim van der Zwaluw and colleagues in PLoS ONE in 2015.<sup>[1](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0123690)</sup> Demonstrating enzymatic hydrolysis of β-lactam antibiotics by incubating them with bacterial suspensions dates back to the late 1970s, but the CIM was the first method to use antibiotic susceptibility-testing disks, which are globally available at low cost with long shelf lives, as substrate aliquots.<sup>[1](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0123690)</sup> The Carba NP test inspired CIM as a lower-cost alternative.<sup>[1](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0123690)</sup>\n\nThe modified CIM (mCIM) was reported by [Virginia M. Pierce](https://www.edgepedia.org/virginia-pierce) and colleagues in the Journal of Clinical Microbiology in 2017<sup>[2](https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.00193-17)</sup>, and the CLSI Subcommittee voted to add it to the 27th edition of the M100 supplement as a reliable, standardized method.<sup>[2](https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.00193-17)</sup> The simplified CIM (sCIM) was introduced by Xiaopeng Jing and colleagues in Frontiers in [Microbiology](https://www.edgepedia.org/microbiology) in 2018<sup>[7](https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2018.02391)</sup>, the EDTA-modified CIM (eCIM) by M. M. Sfeir and colleagues in the Journal of Clinical Microbiology in 2019<sup>[8](https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.01757-18)</sup>, and mCIMplus by Morgane Petit and colleagues in the same journal in 2020.<sup>[9](https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.01370-20)</sup>\n\n## Variants\n\n**mCIM.** Uses tryptic soy broth instead of water and extends the inactivation incubation from 2 to 4 hours.<sup>[2](https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.00193-17)</sup> The single site that directly compared mCIM to CIM found mCIM more sensitive (93% versus 82%) and equally specific (100%).<sup>[2](https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.00193-17)</sup>\n\n**sCIM.** Eliminates the broth incubation by smearing 1–3 overnight colonies directly onto a 10 µg imipenem disk, placed bacteria-side down on Mueller-Hinton agar inoculated with *E. coli* ATCC 25922 and read after 16–18 h.<sup>[7](https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2018.02391)</sup> [Imipenem](https://www.edgepedia.org/imipenem) was chosen because it was more rapidly hydrolyzed, giving a uniform 6 mm zone for all tested carbapenemase producers; zones of 6–20 mm (or ≤22 mm with satellite colonies) are positive, ≥26 mm negative, and 23–25 mm indeterminate.<sup>[7](https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2018.02391)</sup>\n\n**rCIM.** Reduces detection time from more than 24 h to less than 3 h by incubating two 10 µl loopfuls of bacteria with two meropenem disks in 1 ml water for 30 min, centrifuging, and measuring growth of indicator *E. coli* in trypticase soy broth nephelometrically every 30 min for 2 h.<sup>[10](https://academic.oup.com/jac/article-pdf/73/4/900/24269645/dkx519.pdf)</sup>\n\n**mzCIM.** Suspends two 10 µl loops of bacteria in 400 µl brain heart infusion broth supplemented with ZnSO₄ (1.5 mM final concentration), incubates a 10 µg meropenem disk for 4 hours at 35 ± 1 °C, and reads zones of ≤18 mm positive, 19–20 mm indeterminate, and ≥21 mm negative.<sup>[4](https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/spectrum.03015-23)</sup>\n\n**mCIM-A.** Adds ammonium bicarbonate to the mCIM, on the rationale that bicarbonate compounds increase the activity of the carboxylated lysine residues in the active region of OXA-48.<sup>[11](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1341321X2030341X)</sup>\n\nThe eCIM adds EDTA to detect metallo-β-lactamases, and mCIMplus aims at rapid detection and characterization of carbapenemases.<sup>[8](https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.01757-18)</sup><sup> • </sup><sup>[9](https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.01370-20)</sup>\n\n## Applications\n\nThe original CIM showed 100% concordance with PCR for Enterobacteriaceae and 98.8% for non-fermenters, detecting carbapenemases encoded by KPC, NDM, OXA-48, VIM, IMP, and OXA-23 genes.<sup>[1](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0123690)</sup> In a 205-isolate comparison that included 48 rare carbapenemases (OXA-23, OXA-58, GES, IMI, GIM, among others), sensitivity was 98.3% for mzCIM and 100% for sCIM but only 60.4% for mCIM and 50% for Carba NP.<sup>[4](https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/spectrum.03015-23)</sup>\n\nTurnaround is the main practical constraint. One evaluation found CIM results not interpretable within 8 hours, requiring the 2-hour incubation plus overnight culture<sup>[6](https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0170769)</sup>, whereas the original authors reported detection within eight hours with a 6-hour read option.<sup>[1](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0123690)</sup> The rCIM, at about $0.23–$1 per test, was explicitly designed for implementation in low-resource settings, though it requires a nephelometer and centrifuge.<sup>[10](https://academic.oup.com/jac/article-pdf/73/4/900/24269645/dkx519.pdf)</sup> CLSI recommends the mCIM as the preferred CPE detection method.<sup>[3](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8597650/)</sup>\n\n## Limitations and alternatives\n\nFalse positives occur with non-carbapenemase resistance mechanisms: in one evaluation, false positives were especially observed with AmpC over-producers (4 of 7).<sup>[6](https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0170769)</sup>\n\nFalse negatives cluster among weakly expressed enzymes. Two OXA-23-positive \\(A.\\ baumannii\\) isolates and a weakly expressing bla\\(_{\\text{VIM-1}}\\) \\(P.\\ mirabilis\\) were CIM-negative at 2 hours; a 4-hour incubation resolved the Acinetobacter isolates.<sup>[1](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0123690)</sup> In a collection of extensively drug-resistant isolates, the 12 mCIM false negatives were linked to \\( bla_{\\mathrm{VIM}} \\) (6/12), \\( bla_{\\mathrm{IMP}} \\) (3/12), \\( bla_{\\mathrm{KPC}} \\) (2/12), and \\( bla_{\\mathrm{OXA\\text{-}48}} \\) (1/12), with 11 of 12 being *A. baumannii*.<sup>[12](https://annalsmicrobiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13213-021-01634-8)</sup> All 20 sCIM false negatives in a Japanese collection were IMP-1 producers.<sup>[3](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8597650/)</sup>\n\nMedia interference is documented for chromogenic media: carbapenemase activity could not be detected in 4 of 9 positive isolates grown on Oxoid CRE chromogenic plates containing a carbapenem.<sup>[1](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0123690)</sup> Indeterminate results are also a workload issue; in the 205-isolate comparison they were most frequent with mCIM (14.4%), then Carba NP (8.2%), and sCIM (6.3%).<sup>[4](https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/spectrum.03015-23)</sup>\n\nAgainst the modified Hodge test, CIM-type assays perform better and are simpler to read: in a Korean evaluation CIM reached 96% sensitivity and 100% specificity versus 77% and 94% for the MHT.<sup>[13](https://www.acm.or.kr/1904-01/)</sup> The MHT was removed from CLSI M100 (28th edition, 2018) because it was no longer considered a reliable phenotypic method for carbapenemase detection; the mCIM, standardized in the M100 supplement, remained one of several phenotypic options alongside others such as the Carba NP test.<sup>[12](https://annalsmicrobiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13213-021-01634-8)</sup>\n\nAgainst colorimetric and molecular methods, the trade-off is cost and speed. The mCIM costs less than $1 per test, versus $2–10 for Carba NP and $55 list price for Cepheid Xpert Carba-R, but requires overnight incubation with the indicator organism, unlike molecular methods and Carba NP which give results within a single work shift, and a positive result does not identify the specific carbapenemase gene.<sup>[2](https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.00193-17)</sup> The NG-Test Carba 5 immunochromatographic assay detects KPC, OXA-48, VIM, IMP, and NDM in about 15–20 minutes, but its reported sensitivity for IMP producers ranged 55.6%–100%.<sup>[3](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8597650/)</sup>\n\n## References\n\n1. [Kim van der Zwaluw and colleagues (2015). The Carbapenem Inactivation Method (CIM), a Simple and Low-Cost Alternative for the Carba NP Test to Assess Phenotypic Carbapenemase Activity in Gram-Negative Rods. PLoS ONE.](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0123690)\n2. [Virginia M. Pierce and colleagues (2017). Modified Carbapenem Inactivation Method for Phenotypic Detection of Carbapenemase Production among Enterobacteriaceae. Journal of Clinical Microbiology.](https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.00193-17)\n3. [Comparison of sCIM and Other Phenotypic Detection Methods for Carbapenemase-Producing Enterobacterales](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8597650/)\n4. [Detection of rare carbapenemases in Enterobacterales, comparison of two colorimetric and three CIM-based carbapenemase assays](https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/spectrum.03015-23)\n5. [Variability of reagents matters, enhancements to the CLSI modified carbapenem inactivation method outside the United States to improve accuracy](https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.01509-24)\n6. [Retrospective and prospective evaluation of the Carbapenem inactivation method for the detection of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae](https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0170769)\n7. [Xiaopeng Jing and colleagues (2018). The Simplified Carbapenem Inactivation Method (sCIM) for Simple and Accurate Detection of Carbapenemase-Producing Gram-Negative Bacilli. Frontiers in Microbiology.](https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2018.02391)\n8. [M. M. Sfeir and colleagues (2019). EDTA-Modified Carbapenem Inactivation Method: a Phenotypic Method for Detecting Metallo-β-Lactamase-Producing Enterobacteriaceae. Journal of Clinical Microbiology.](https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.01757-18)\n9. [Morgane Petit and colleagues (2020). Rapid Detection and Characterization of Carbapenemases in Enterobacterales with a New Modified Carbapenem Inactivation Method, mCIMplus. Journal of Clinical Microbiology.](https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.01370-20)\n10. [Evaluation of the rapid carbapenem inactivation method (rCIM)](https://academic.oup.com/jac/article-pdf/73/4/900/24269645/dkx519.pdf)\n11. [Evaluation of phenotypic tests for detection of carbapenemases: New modifications with new interpretation](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1341321X2030341X)\n12. [Modified CIM test as a useful tool to detect carbapenemase activity among extensively drug-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae, Escherichia coli and Acinetobacter baumannii](https://annalsmicrobiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13213-021-01634-8)\n13. [Carbapenem Inactivation Method: Accurate Detection and Easy Interpretation of Carbapenemase Production in Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas spp.](https://www.acm.or.kr/1904-01/)\n\n---\n*Topic: Encyclopedia › Life and health › Human health and medicine › Clinical assessment and procedures › Diagnosis and clinical assessment › Laboratory and in-vitro diagnostics › Genetic and genomic testing*\n\n*Initially written Sep 29, 2026 · Edited: Oct 15, 2026*\n\n*Copyright 2026 EdgeChat AI, a subsidiary of Biostate AI.*\n\nLicense: Edgepedia Community License 1.0, https://www.edgepedia.org/edgepedia/license\n",
 "same_as": [],
 "url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/carbapenem-inactivation-method",
 "markdown_url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/carbapenem-inactivation-method.md",
 "license": {
  "name": "Edgepedia Community License 1.0",
  "url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/edgepedia/license",
  "summary": "Free with credit, commercial use included. AI training is open to everyone. For other uses, organizations over USD 100M in revenue or 100M monthly users license separately.",
  "spdx": "LicenseRef-Edgepedia-Community-1.0"
 },
 "credit": "\"Carbapenem inactivation method\", Edgepedia (EdgeChat), https://www.edgepedia.org/carbapenem-inactivation-method. Edgepedia Community License 1.0.",
 "credit_md": "\"[Carbapenem inactivation method](https://www.edgepedia.org/carbapenem-inactivation-method)\", Edgepedia (EdgeChat), [https://www.edgepedia.org/carbapenem-inactivation-method](https://www.edgepedia.org/carbapenem-inactivation-method). [Edgepedia Community License 1.0](https://www.edgepedia.org/edgepedia/license).",
 "credit_html": "\"<a href=\"https://www.edgepedia.org/carbapenem-inactivation-method\">Carbapenem inactivation method</a>\", Edgepedia (EdgeChat), <a href=\"https://www.edgepedia.org/carbapenem-inactivation-method\">https://www.edgepedia.org/carbapenem-inactivation-method</a>. <a href=\"https://www.edgepedia.org/edgepedia/license\">Edgepedia Community License 1.0</a>.",
 "speakable": "The carbapenem inactivation method is a low-cost phenotypic assay that detects carbapenemase production in Gram-negative bacteria using a meropenem disk and an E. coli indicator strain."
}