| Literature DB >> 27818659 |
Meijie Jiang1, Lijuan Liu2, Yunhua Ma3, Zhijun Zhang1, Ning Li4, Fusen Zhang5, Shuping Zhao1.
Abstract
Acinetobacter baumannii is an emerging nosocomial pathogen prevalent in hospitals worldwide. In order to understand the molecular epidemiology of multi-drug resistant (MDR) A. baumannii, we investigated the genotypes of A. baumannii isolated from 10 hospitals in Shandong, China, from August 2013 to December 2013, by pulsed field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) and multilocus sequence typing (MLST). Antimicrobial resistance genes were analyzed by PCR and DNA sequencing. By PFGE analysis, we discovered 11 PFGE types in these 10 hospitals. By MLST, we assigned these isolates to 12 sequence types (STs), 10 of which belong to the cloning complex CC92, including the prevalent ST369, ST208, ST195, and ST368. Two new STs, namely ST794 and ST809, were detected only in one hospital. All isolates of the MDR A. baumannii were resistant to carbapenem, except 2 isolates, which did not express the blaOXA-23 carbapenemase gene, indicating blaOXA-23 is the major player for carbapenem resistance. We also discovered armA is likely to be responsible for amikacin resistance, and may play a role in gentamicin and tobramycin resistance. aac(3)-I is another gene responsible for gentamicin and tobramycin resistance. In summary, we discovered that the majority of the isolates in Shandong, China, were the STs belonging to the CC92. Besides, two new STs were detected in one hospital. These new STs should be further investigated for prevention of outbreaks caused by A. baumannii.Entities:
Keywords: hospitals; molecular epidemiology; multi-drug resistant Acinetobacter baumannii; multilocus sequence typing; pulsed-field gel electrophoresis
Year: 2016 PMID: 27818659 PMCID: PMC5073130 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2016.01687
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
Figure 1Geographical locations of the 10 tertiary-care teaching hospitals in Shandong, China.
The source of the .
| 1 | 001–026 | 26 | 16 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 | ||||||||
| 2 | 027–041 | 12 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 11 | 1 | 2 | 1 | |||||||
| 3 | 042–056 | 15 | 14 | 1 | ||||||||||||
| 4 | 057–071 | 15 | 15 | |||||||||||||
| 5 | 072–084 | 13 | 13 | |||||||||||||
| 6 | 085–099 | 11 | 3 | 1 | 6 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 1 | |||||||
| 7 | 100–109 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | |||||||
| 8 | 110–119 | 8 | 2 | 7 | 3 | |||||||||||
| 9 | 120–145 | 26 | 14 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 2 | |||||||||
| 10 | 146–154 | 9 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 2 | ||||||||||
| Sum | 154 | 139 | 2 | 8 | 1 | 4 | 102 | 21 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 4 | 5 |
SP, sputum; UR, urine; WO, wound; AP, abdominal paracentesis; CF, Cerebrospinal fluid.
ICU, intensive care unit; NSW, Neurosurgery ward; RW, Respiratory ward; NW, Neurology ward; HSW, Hand surgery ward; CW, Cardiology ward; TSW, Thoracic surgery ward; GW, Geriatrics ward; BW, Burn ward; ED, Emergency Department.
Figure 2isolates from Hospital-1 to -10, respectively. The 85% was set as a cutoff to define PFGE types. The dendrogram was generated by the BioNumerics software.
The distribution of STs of MDRAB in each hospital.
| Hospital-1 | 13 | 6 | 1 | 2 | 4 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Hospital-2 | – | 6 | – | 8 | 1 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Hospital-3 | – | 1 | 4 | – | 6 | – | 3 | – | – | – | – | 1 |
| Hospital-4 | – | 5 | 5 | 2 | – | – | – | 3 | – | – | – | – |
| Hospital-5 | 1 | 1 | 6 | – | – | – | – | – | 2 | 2 | 1 | – |
| Hospital-6 | 5 | 6 | 4 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Hospital-7 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Hospital-8 | – | – | – | 1 | – | 9 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Hospital-9 | 26 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Hospital-10 | – | – | 6 | 1 | – | – | 1 | – | 1 | – | – | – |
| Sum | 46 | 28 | 27 | 16 | 14 | 9 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
“–,” no ST was detected in this hospital.
Figure 3Dendogram of . At least one representative of all different STs obtained from each hospital was selected to make the dendogram. The 85% was set as a cutoff to define PFGE types. The dendrogram was generated by the BioNumerics software.
Antimicrobial susceptibility profiles of .
| imipenem | 152 | 98.7 | 0 | 0.0 | 2 | 1.3 |
| meropenem | 152 | 98.1 | 0 | 0.0 | 2 | 1.3 |
| piperacillin/ tazobactam | 154 | 100 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 |
| cefepime | 154 | 100 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 |
| ceftazidime | 154 | 100 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 |
| cefotaxime | 154 | 100 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 |
| ceftriaxone | 154 | 100 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 |
| levofloxacin | 138 | 89.6 | 13 | 8.4 | 3 | 1.9 |
| ciprofloxacin | 138 | 89.6 | 13 | 8.4 | 3 | 1.9 |
| amikacin | 143 | 92.9 | 0 | 0.0 | 11 | 7.1 |
| tobramycin | 145 | 94.2 | 0 | 0.0 | 9 | 5.8 |
| gentamicin | 145 | 94.2 | 0 | 0.0 | 9 | 5.8 |
| piperacillin | 154 | 100 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 |
| tigecycline | 10 | 6.5 | 21 | 13.6 | 123 | 79.9 |
| Trimethoprim/ sulfamethoxazole | 142 | 92.2 | 0 | 0.0 | 12 | 7.8 |
| polymyxin B | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 | 154 | 100 |
Distribution of the carbapenemase genes, aminoglycoside genes, carbapenem resistance, and aminoglycoside antimicrobial resistance of the isolates.
| 25 | + | + | − | R | R | + | − | − | − | − | R | R | R |
| 3 | + | + | − | R | R | − | − | + | − | − | S | S | S |
| 39 | + | + | − | R | R | + | + | + | − | − | R | R | R |
| 2 | + | + | − | R | R | + | − | + | − | − | R | R | R |
| 3 | + | + | − | R | R | + | − | + | + | − | R | R | R |
| 9 | + | + | − | R | R | + | + | + | + | − | R | R | R |
| 2 | + | + | − | R | R | − | − | − | − | − | S | S | S |
| 1 | + | + | − | R | R | − | − | + | + | − | S | R | R |
| 1 | + | + | − | R | R | + | + | + | − | + | R | R | R |
| 1 | − | + | − | S | S | + | − | + | + | − | R | R | R |
| 1 | − | + | − | S | S | + | + | + | + | − | R | R | R |
| 4 | + | − | + | R | R | − | − | − | − | − | S | S | S |
| 13 | + | − | + | R | R | + | + | + | + | − | R | R | R |
| 1 | + | − | + | R | R | − | − | + | + | − | S | R | R |
| 4 | + | − | + | R | R | + | − | − | − | − | R | R | R |
| 28 | + | − | + | R | R | + | + | + | − | − | R | R | R |
| 16 | + | − | + | R | R | + | − | + | + | − | R | R | R |
| 1 | + | − | + | R | R | + | − | + | − | − | R | R | R |
| Sum | 152 | 87 | 67 | 143 | 91 | 119 | 45 | 1 | |||||
“+” indicates the gene was detected; “−” indicates the gene was not detected; “R” indicates the strain was resistant to the antibiotic; “S” indicates the strain was susceptible to antibiotic. .