What is the difference between carbapenemase-producing and AmpC (Ampicillin C)-producing bacteria?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: December 17, 2025View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

Carbapenemase-Producing vs. AmpC-Producing Bacteria: Key Clinical Differences

Fundamental Mechanism Distinction

Carbapenemase producers hydrolyze carbapenems and nearly all beta-lactams, while AmpC producers remain susceptible to carbapenems despite resistance to cephalosporins. 1, 2

The critical difference lies in substrate specificity:

  • Carbapenemases (Classes A, B, and D) actively destroy carbapenems, rendering them ineffective 3, 1
  • AmpC beta-lactamases (Class C) hydrolyze cephalosporins and penicillins but carbapenems remain stable against these enzymes 4, 2

Resistance Spectrum

Carbapenemase Producers

  • Confer resistance to virtually all beta-lactams including carbapenems, broad-spectrum cephalosporins, penicillins, and beta-lactamase inhibitor combinations 3, 1
  • Three main enzyme classes with distinct profiles:
    • KPC (Class A): Most common globally at 47.4% of carbapenem-resistant isolates 3, 5
    • Metallo-beta-lactamases/MBLs (Class B): Hydrolyze all beta-lactams except aztreonam; represent 20.6% of cases 3, 1
    • OXA-48 (Class D): Account for 19% of carbapenemases 3, 5

AmpC Producers

  • Confer resistance to cephalothin, cefazolin, cefoxitin, most penicillins, and beta-lactamase inhibitor combinations 2
  • Mediate resistance to third-generation cephalosporins (cefotaxime, ceftazidime, ceftriaxone) when overexpressed 2
  • Critically, remain susceptible to carbapenems 3, 4, 2
  • Can be chromosomal (cAmpC) in Enterobacter, Citrobacter, Serratia species or plasmid-mediated (pAmpC) in E. coli, Klebsiella, Proteus 6, 2

Clinical Expression Patterns

Carbapenemase Producers

  • Constitutively expressed resistance that is immediately apparent on susceptibility testing 3
  • Require rapid molecular testing to identify specific carbapenemase family for optimal treatment selection 3

AmpC Producers

  • Inducible expression (chromosomal AmpC): Strains initially appear susceptible to third-generation cephalosporins but develop resistance during therapy through mutation 6, 2
  • Constitutive expression (plasmid-mediated AmpC): Resistance is immediately apparent 6
  • This inducibility creates a major pitfall: Enterobacter species may test susceptible to ceftriaxone initially but develop resistance mid-treatment, causing clinical failure 3, 2

Treatment Implications

Carbapenemase Producers

Treatment depends entirely on enzyme class 3, 5:

  • KPC producers: Ceftazidime/avibactam or meropenem/vaborbactam as first-line (STRONG recommendation) 5
  • MBL producers: Ceftazidime/avibactam PLUS aztreonam or cefiderocol (STRONG recommendation) 5
  • OXA-48 producers: Ceftazidime/avibactam (CONDITIONAL recommendation) 5

AmpC Producers

  • Carbapenems remain the preferred option, especially for severe infections 6, 7
  • Cefepime is a carbapenem-sparing alternative supported by clinical evidence 6
  • Avoid third-generation cephalosporins in species with inducible AmpC (Enterobacter, Citrobacter, Serratia) even if initially susceptible 3, 2

Epidemiological Context

Carbapenemase Producers

  • Predominantly healthcare-associated infections 3
  • Carbapenem resistance increased seven-fold since 2006 in Europe 3, 5
  • Some countries report >50% carbapenem resistance in K. pneumoniae 3

AmpC Producers

  • Plasmid-mediated AmpC common in community-acquired infections 6
  • Chromosomal AmpC producers mainly healthcare-associated 6

Critical Pitfalls to Avoid

Never use third-generation cephalosporins for serious infections caused by Enterobacter, Citrobacter, or Serratia species, even when susceptibility testing shows sensitivity 3, 2. These organisms have inducible chromosomal AmpC that will develop resistance during therapy.

Do not assume carbapenem resistance means carbapenemase production 3. Some strains achieve carbapenem resistance through porin loss combined with AmpC or ESBL production, not carbapenemase enzymes 3, 8.

Recognize that 5-10% of cephalosporin-resistant K. pneumoniae produce plasmid-mediated AmpC rather than ESBL 3. These strains remain carbapenem-susceptible unless porin loss occurs 3, 8.

References

Guideline

Resistencia a Antibióticos Mediada por β-lactamasas

Praxis Medical Insights: Practical Summaries of Clinical Guidelines, 2025

Research

AmpC beta-lactamases.

Clinical microbiology reviews, 2009

Guideline

Guideline Directed Topic Overview

Dr.Oracle Medical Advisory Board & Editors, 2025

Guideline

Carbapenemase-Producing Enterobacterales

Praxis Medical Insights: Practical Summaries of Clinical Guidelines, 2025

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.