| Literature DB >> 29225595 |
Jin-Xin Zheng1, Yang Wu2, Zhi-Wei Lin1, Zhang-Ya Pu1, Wei-Ming Yao1, Zhong Chen1, Duo-Yun Li1, Qi-Wen Deng1, Di Qu2, Zhi-Jian Yu1.
Abstract
Enterococcus faecalis biofilm traits and distribution characteristics in China have not been clarified. This study aimed to determine the prevalence and characteristics of E. faecalis biofilm formation in a sample of clinical isolates and to explore the virulence factors associated with biofilm formation in those isolates. A total of 265 E. faecalis isolates were collected from patients in Shenzhen, China. Virulence genes were detected within the genomes of the microbes by polymerase chain reaction. The isolates were subjected to multilocus sequence typing (MLST) based on housekeeping genes. Biofilms were detected by crystal violet staining. The expression levels of the clinical E. faecalis isolates' genes were determined by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction. The prevalence of biofilm formation among E. faecalis clinical isolates was 47.2%. MLST yielded 44 different sequence types (STs). The main STs were ST16 and ST179; the ST16 isolates were more likely to form strong or medium biofilm than the ST179 isolates (p < 0.001). Strong or medium biofilm formation was more common in linezolid-resistant isolates than in linezolid-sensitive isolates (p = 0.001). Biofilm formation was more frequently detected in enterococcal surface protein (esp+), surface aggregating protein (asa1+), cytolysin A (cylA+), or aggregation substance (agg+) positive isolates than in isolates that were negative (-) for these virulence factors. Multivariate regression analysis indicated that cylA [odds ratio (OR) 4.083, p < 0.001] was a risk factor for weak biofilm formation, and that esp (OR 8.207, p < 0.001) was a risk factor for strong or medium biofilm formation. The expression of cylA was raised (4.02 to 6.00-fold) in weak biofilm isolates compared to the biofilm-negative isolates, and the expression of esp was greatly elevated (11.39 to 134.08-fold) in strong biofilm isolates compared to biofilm-negative isolates. In conclusion, the ST16 classification and linezolid resistance were positively associated with strong/medium biofilm formation in clinical E. faecalis isolates. cylA was associated with weak biofilm formation, and esp was only associated with strong or medium biofilm formation of the clinical E. faecalis isolates.Entities:
Keywords: Enterococcus faecalis; biofilm formation; linezolid resistance; multilocus sequence typing; virulence genes
Year: 2017 PMID: 29225595 PMCID: PMC5705541 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2017.02338
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
PCR primers used for detection of Enterococcus faecalis virulence factors.
| Target | Primer | Primer sequence (5′–3′) | Amplicon size (bp) | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AATTGATTCTTTAGCATCTGG | 510 | |||
| AGATTCATCTTTGATTCTTGG | ||||
| TATGACAATGCTTTTTGGGAT | 213 | |||
| AGATGCACCCGAAATAATATA | ||||
| GCACGCTATTACGAACTATGA | 375 | |||
| TAAGAAAGAACATCACCACGA | ||||
| ACTCGGGGATTGATAGGC | 688 | |||
| GCTGCTAAAGCTGCGCTT | ||||
| GACTGACGTCCAAGTTTCCAA | 276 | |||
| ACAGAAGAGCTGCAGGAAATG | ||||
| CCAGTAATCAGTCCAGAAACAACC | 406 | |||
| TAGCTTTTTTCATTCTTGTGTTTGTT |
PCR primers used for E. faecalis MLST gene diversity determination.
| Target | Primer | Primer sequence (5′–3′) | Amplicon size (bp) | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GGCGCACTAAAAGATATGGT | 530 | |||
| CCAAGATTGGGCAACTTCGTCCCA | ||||
| CAAACTGCTTAG CTCCAATGGC | 395 | |||
| CATTTCGTTGTCATACCAAGC | ||||
| CGGAACAGGACTTTCGC | 583 | |||
| ATTTACATCACGTTCTACTTGC | ||||
| GATTTTGTGGGAATTGGTATGG | 438 | |||
| ACCATTAAAGCAAAATGATCGC | ||||
| TGGAAAACTTTACGGAGACAGC | 459 | |||
| GTCCTG TCCATTGTTCAAAAGC | ||||
| AAAATGATGGCCGTGTATTAGG, | 456 | |||
| AACGTCACCGTTCCTTCACTTA | ||||
| CAGCTTAAGTCAAG TAAGTGCCG | 436 | |||
| GAATATCCCTTCTGCTTGTGCT |
PCR primers used for determining the expression levels of esp and cylA of E. faecalis isolates by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR).
| Target | Primer | Primer sequence (5′–3′) | Amplicon size (bp) | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CGACTAATGTCTCAAGCACTAC | 106 | This study | ||
| CGAACATCACGCCAACTT | ||||
| GCATCAGTATTAGTTGGT | 196 | This study | ||
| TTCCTTGTAACACATCAC | ||||
| GGAGGATATGGTGACAAT | 163 | This study | ||
| TTACTTCTGGAGTTGCTAA |
Occurrence of E. faecalis biofilm formation by clinical source.
| Clinical source (no. isolates tested) | No. (%) of isolates with biofilm phenotype | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strong | Medium | Weak | All positive | ||
| Blood (25) | 5 (20.0) | 1 (4.0) | 4 (16.0) | 10 (40.0) | |
| Urine (113) | 15 (13.3) | 15 (13.3) | 27 (23.9) | 57 (50.4) | |
| Pus or secretions (64) | 6 (9.4) | 1 (1.6) | 22 (34.4) | 29 (45.3) | |
| Bile (19) | 1 (5.3) | 4 (21.1) | 2 (10.5) | 7 (36.8) | |
| Othera (44) | 8 (18.2) | 3 (6.8) | 11 (25.0) | 22 (50.0) | |
| Total (265) | 35 (13.2) | 24 (9.1) | 66 (24.9) | 125 (47.2) | |
Biofilm-forming capacity comparison between ST16 and ST179 isolates.
| Biofilm phenotype | No. (%) with phenotype | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Strong | 19 (24.1) | 1 (1.5) | <0.001 |
| Medium | 9 (11.4) | 3 (4.4) | NS |
| <0.001 | |||
| Weak | 20 (25.3) | 24 (35.3) | NS |
| All positive | 48 (60.8) | 28 (41.2) | 0.018 |
Correlation between biofilm-forming capacity and linezolid sensitivity.
| Biofilm phenotype | No. (%) with linezolid MIC in μg/ml | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| MIC ≤ 2, | MIC 2–8, | MIC ≥ 8, | |
| Strong | 24 (11.2) | 9 (22.0) | 2 (20.0) |
| Medium | 19 (8.9) | 0 (0.0) | 5 (50.0)a |
| Weak | 52 (24.3) | 12 (29.3) | 2 (20.0) |
| All positive | 95 (44.4) | 21 (51.2) | 9 (90.0)c |
Relationship between biofilm-forming capacity and virulence factors.
| Virulence factors (no. isolates tested) | No. (%) of isolates with biofilm phenotype | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strong | Medium | Weak | All positive | |||
| 30 (18.4) | 20 (12.3) | 47 (28.8) | 97 (59.5) | |||
| 5 (4.9) | 4 (3.9) | 19 (18.6) | 28 (27.5) | |||
| 12 (7.0) | 13 (7.6) | 46 (26.9) | 71 (41.5) | |||
| 23 (24.5)b | 11 (11.7) | 20 (21.3) | 54 (57.4) | |||
| 32 (19.4) | 20 (9.7) | 57 (26.0) | 109 (55.1) | |||
| 3 (5.5) | 4 (7.3) | 9 (16.4) | 16 (29.1) | |||
| 26 (14.6) | 19 (10.7) | 57 (32.0) | 102 (57.3) | |||
| 9 (10.3) | 5 (5.7) | 9 (10.3) | 23 (26.4) | |||
| 7 (8.4) | 6 (7.2) | 20 (24.1) | 33 (39.8) | 0.103 | ||
| 28 (15.4) | 18 (9.9) | 46 (25.3) | 92 (50.5) | |||
| 11 (12.5) | 12 (13.6) | 27 (30.7) | 50 (56.8) | |||
| 24 (13.6) | 12 (6.8) | 39 (22.0) | 75 (42.4) | |||
Multivariate regression analysis of virulence factors associated with E. faecalis biofilm formation.
| Isolate biofilm phenotype | Factor | OR (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Weak biofilm formation | |||
| 4.083 (1.912–8.716) | |||
| Strong or medium biofilm formation | |||
| 0.300 (0.159–0.564) | |||
| 0.393 (0.146–1.056) | 0.064 | ||
| 8.207 (2.795–24.099) |