| Literature DB >> 27400864 |
Abdoul-Salam Ouedraogo1,2,3,4, Mahamadou Sanou5, Aimée Kissou6, Soufiane Sanou6, Hermann Solaré7, Firmin Kaboré6, Armel Poda6, Salim Aberkane8,9,10, Nicolas Bouzinbi8,9,10, Idrissa Sano7, Boubacar Nacro6, Lassana Sangaré7, Christian Carrière8,9,10, Dominique Decré11,12,13, Rasmata Ouégraogo5, Hélène Jean-Pierre8, Sylvain Godreuil8,9,10.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nothing is known about the epidemiology and resistance mechanisms of extended-spectrum ß-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (ESBL-PE) in Burkina Faso. The objective of this study was to determine ESBL-PE prevalence and to characterize ESBL genes in Burkina Faso.Entities:
Keywords: Burkina Faso; Clinical samples; ESBL; Enterobacteriaceae; Inpatient and outpatient
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27400864 PMCID: PMC4939587 DOI: 10.1186/s12879-016-1655-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Infect Dis ISSN: 1471-2334 Impact factor: 3.090
Demographic characteristics and source of the bacterial isolates
| Outpatients ( | Inpatients ( | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variable | ESBL-positive | ESBL-negative | Odds Ratio (95 % CI) |
| ESBL-positive | ESBL-negative | Odds Ratio (95 % CI) |
|
| ( | ( | ( | ( | |||||
| Sex | <0.001 | 0.724 | ||||||
| F ( | 16 | 48 | 1 | 47 | 18 | 1 | ||
| M ( | 52 | 34 | 4.59 (2.14–9.84) | 64 | 29 | 0.85 (0.42–1.70) | ||
| Source of isolates | 0.019 | 0.139 | ||||||
| Urine sample ( | 59 | 60 | 1 | 48 | 18 | 1 | ||
| Pus ( | 06 | 07 | 0.87 (0.28–2.75) | 32 | 11 | 1.09 (0.46–2.61) | ||
| Aspirate ( | 02 | 03 | 0.68 (0.11–4.20) | 24 | 09 | 1.00 (0.39–2.56) | ||
| Othera ( | 01 | 12 | 0.08 (0.01–0.67) | 07 | 09 | 0.29 (0.09–0.90) | ||
| Age | <0.001 | 0.607 | ||||||
| ≤28 days | 01 | 02 | 1 | 09 | 04 | 1 | ||
| >28 days–1 year | 01 | 08 | 0.20 (0.01–4.72) | 07 | 04 | 0.78 (0.14–4.27) | ||
| >1–5 years | 02 | 15 | 0.31 (0.02–5.19) | 06 | 06 | 0.44 (0.09–2.28) | ||
| >5–15 years | 04 | 07 | 1.14 (0.08–16.95) | 30 | 12 | 1.11 (0.29–4.31) | ||
| >15–65 years | 44 | 45 | 1.96 (0.17–22.35) | 49 | 19 | 1.15 (0.32–4.17) | ||
| >65 years | 16 | 05 | 6.40 (0.47–86.34) | 10 | 02 | 2.22 (0.33–15.18) | ||
Abbreviations: CI confidence interval, ESBL extended-spectrum beta-lactamase, F females, M males, n number
aOther: stool, cerebrospinal fluid, blood samples and high vaginal swabs
Prevalence of ESBL-producing isolates among the different Enterobacteriaceae species identified in our samples
| Distribution of ESBL-producing isolates in samples (%) | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Species | Within species | Total | Urine | Stool | Blood | Pus | Aspirates | HVS | CSF |
| (%) | ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | ||
|
| 121/202 (60 %) | 67.5 % | 67/114 | 0/15 | 0 | 29/39 | 23/31 | 2/2 | 0/1 |
|
| 46/70 (66 %) | 26 % | 32/51 | 0 | 5/6 | 6/8 | 3/4 | 0/1 | 0 |
|
| 7/13 (54 %) | 4 % | 6/10 | 0 | 0 | 1/3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
| 1/3 (33 %) | 0.5 % | 1/2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0/1 | 0 | 0 |
|
| 0/1 | – | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0/1 | 0 | 0 |
|
| 1/3 (33 %) | 0.5 % | 1 /2 | 0 | 0 | 0/1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
| 0/5 | – | 0/4 | 0 | 0 | 0/1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
| 2/6 (33 %) | 1 % | 0/1 | 0 | 1/1 | 1/3 | 0/1 | 0 | 0 |
|
| 0/3 | – | 0 | 0/1 | 0/1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0/1 |
|
| 1/1 (100 %) | 0.5 % | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1/1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
| 0/1 | – | 0/1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total (%) | 179/308 (58 %) | 100 % | 107/185 | 0/16 | 6/8 | 38/56 | 26/38 | 2/3 | 0/2 |
Abbreviations: CSF cerebrospinal fluid, ESBL extended-spectrum beta-lactamase, HVS high vaginal swab, n = number
Fig. 1Results of the antibiotic susceptibility test for the 179 ESBL-producing (ESBL-PE) and the 129 non-ESBL-producing (NON ESBL-PE) Enterobacteriaceae isolates. The histogram shows the percentage of ESBL-PE and NON ESBL-PE isolates that were susceptible to each tested antibiotic compound. Y axis: Antibiotic susceptibility (%)
Characterization of genes encoding beta lactamases in the 179 ESBL-producer isolates
| Outpatients ( | Inpatients ( | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Isolates ( | Hospital ( | ESBL Type | Other ß-lactamases | ESBL Types | Other ß-lactamases |
|
| CHU-YO (37) | CTX-M-15 (1) | OXA-1(1) | CTX-M-14 (1) | SHV-1, TEM −1 (1) |
| CTX-M-15 (2) | SHV-1 (2) | CTX-M-14 (1) | TEM-1 (1) | ||
| CTX-M-15 (1) | TEM-1 (1) | CTX-M-15 (3) | TEM-1, OXA-1 (3) | ||
| CTX-M-15 (1) | – | CTX-M-15 (7) | TEM-1(7) | ||
| – | – | CTX-M-15 (3) | SHV-1 (3) | ||
| – | – | CTX-M-15 (12) | OXA-1 (12) | ||
| – | – | CTX-M-15 (3) | – | ||
| – | – | CTX-M-27 (2) | TEM-1 (2) | ||
| CHUSS (52) | CTX-M-15 (3) | SHV-1, OXA-1 (3) | CTX-M-15 (1) | SHV-1, OXA-1 (1) | |
| CTX-M-15 (1) | TEM-1, OXA-1 (1) | CTX-M-15 (1) | TEM-1, OXA-1 (1) | ||
| CTX-M-15 (2) | TEM-1 (2) | CTX-M-15 (1) | TEM-1 (1) | ||
| CTX-M-15 (27) | OXA-1 (27) | CTX-M-15 (15) | OXA-1 (15) | ||
| SHV-12 (1) | – | – | – | ||
| CHUP-CDG (32) | CTX-M-15 (1) | OXA-1 (1) | CTX-M-14 (2) | TEM-1, OXA-1 (2) | |
| CTX-M-15 (4) | TEM-1(4) | CTX-M-15 (8) | TEM-1, OXA-1 (8) | ||
| CTX-M-27 (1) | OXA-1, TEM-1(1) | CTX-M-15 (10) | TEM-1(10) | ||
| – | – | CTX-M-15 (6) | OXA-1 (6) | ||
|
| CHU-YO (5) | CTX-M-15(1) | TEM-1, OXA-1(1) | CTX-M-15 (1) | SHV-1, OXA-1, TEM-1 (1) |
| SHV-12 (1) | – | CTX-M-15 (2) | OXA-1 (2) | ||
| CHUSS (24) | CTX-M-15(1) | SHV-1, OXA-1, TEM-1(1) | CTX-M-15(3) | SHV-1, OXA-1, TEM-1(3) | |
| CTX-M-15(2) | SHV-1, OXA-1, (2) | CTX-M-15(2) | SHV-1, OXA-1 (2) | ||
| CTX-M-15(3) | SHV-1, TEM-1 (3) | CTX-M-15(2) | OXA-1, TEM-1 (2) | ||
| CTX-M-15(5) | OXA-1 (5) | CTX-M15 (2) | OXA-1 (2) | ||
| CTX-M-15(1) | TEM-1(1) | CTX-M–15(1) | – | ||
| CTX-M-15(2) | SHV-1 (2) | – | – | ||
| CHUP-CDG (17) | CTX-M-15 (2) | OXA-1 (2) | CTX-M-15 (3) | OXA-1(3) | |
| – | – | CTX-M-15 (5) | EM-1, OXA-1 (5) | ||
| – | – | CTX-M-15(4) | SHV-1, TEM-1(4) | ||
| – | – | CTX-M-15(2) | SHV-11 | ||
| – | – | CTX-M-27(1) | SHV-1(1) | ||
| Other strains (12) | CTX-M-15(2) | OXA-1, TEM-1 (2) | CTX-M-15 (5) | OXA-1, TEM-1 | |
| CTX-M-15 (2) | TEM-1, SHV-1 (2) | CTX-M-15 (1) | SHV-11(1) | ||
| CTX-M-27 (1) | OXA-1 (1) | CTXM-15 (1) | – | ||
Abbreviations: N number
Phylogenetic group assignment of the 202 E. coli strains subdivided based on the detection or not of ESBL genes
| ESBL-Positive ( | ESBL-Negative ( | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | B1 | B2 | C | Clade I | D | F | Unknown | ST131 | A | B1 | B2 | C | Clade I | D | F | Unknown | ST131 | |
| Hospital (number of samples) | ||||||||||||||||||
| CHU-YO (55) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Outpatients (16) | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 |
| Inpatients (39) | 9 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 0 | 5 | 6 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1 |
| CHU-SS (90) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Outpatients (59) | 6 | 1 | 11 | 4 | 2 | 8 | 1 | 0 | 8 | 7 | 2 | 7 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 4 |
| Inpatients (31) | 7 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 0 |
| CHUP-CDG (57) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Outpatients (20) | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 7 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Inpatients (37) | 9 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 0 |