Literature DB >> 29299304

Antimicrobial susceptibility of Brucella melitensis in Kazakhstan.

Alexandr Shevtsov1, Marat Syzdykov2, Andrey Kuznetsov2, Alexandr Shustov1, Elena Shevtsova1, Kalysh Berdimuratova1, Kasim Mukanov1, Yerlan Ramankulov1,3.   

Abstract

Background: Kazakhstan belongs to countries with a high level of brucellosis among humans and farm animals. Although antibiotic therapy is the main way to treat acute brucellosis in humans there is still little information on a circulation of the antibiotic-resistant Brucella strains in the Central Eurasia. In this article we describe an occurrence of the drug resistance of Brucella melitensis isolates in Kazakhstan which is among the largest countries of the region.
Methods: Susceptibilities to tetracyclin, gentamycin, doxycyclin, streptomycin and rifampicin were investigated in 329 clinical isolates of Brucella melitensis using E-test method.
Results: All isolates were susceptible to streptomycin, tetracycline and doxycycline. 97.3% of the Brucella isolates were susceptible to gentamycin, although only 37.4% of isolates were susceptible to rifampicin. 21.9% of isolates had intermediate resistance, and 26.4% of isolates were resistant to this antibacterial drug.
Conclusion: Isolates of Brucella melitensis circulating in Kazakhstan are susceptible to streptomycin, doxicyclin, tetracyclin and gentamycin. At the same time the resistance to rifampicin is widespread, almost half of the isolates were rifampicin-resistant (including the intermediate resistance).

Entities:  

Keywords:  Antimicrobial susceptibility; Brucella melitensis; Kazakhstan

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29299304      PMCID: PMC5745643          DOI: 10.1186/s13756-017-0293-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Antimicrob Resist Infect Control        ISSN: 2047-2994            Impact factor:   4.887


Background

Brucellosis remains the most common zoonotic disease with a worldwide incidence estimated at 500 thousand new cases per year [1]. The incidence may be underestimated because of diagnostic errors due to variability in clinical manifestations and underreporting and concealment of data [2, 3]. Infected terrestrial or marine mammals serve as natural reservoirs and infect people through direct contact or through consumption of the Brucella-contaminated livestock products [4]. Majority of brucellosis cases are recorded in the Mediterranean countries, Southern and Central America, Africa, Asia, Arabian Peninsula, Indian subcontinent, South-Eastern Europe and the Middle East region [1, 5]. Among the 12 recognized species in a genus Brucella [6], B. melitensisis is the most common and also the most virulent species which infect humans and causes a debilitating disease [7, 8]. Brucellosis is characterized by variability of clinical manifestations from absence of overt symptoms to multi-organ pathologies [9]. Antibiotics are commonly used to treat brucellosis and may suppress replication of the pathogen. One obstacle to the antibiotic therapy is that Brucella can survive in intracellular environments and replicate in macrophages and dendritic cells. For this reason the antibiotics must have intracellular activity. Also the most preferred antibiotics have low toxicity and are suitable for prolonged regiments [10]. The treatment regiments currently recommended by the WHO use a combination of doxycycline and rifampicin for 6 weeks, or doxycycline for 45 days and streptomycin for 21 days. Brucella spp. actively circulates in humans and domestic animals. During the last 35 years in Kazakhstan an annual incidence rate of the disease in humans varied from 8.5 to 24 cases per 100 thousand (these rates averaged over the whole country) although in some endemic areas the incidence rates exceeded the figures significantly. The most prevalent species in the country in humans is B. melitensis [11]. Antibiotics play an important role in the strategy to treat the disease and predominantly determine effectiveness of the treatment. The widely used antibiotics for etiotropic treatment of brucellosis are tetracyclines, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole, aminoglycosides, rifampicin and fluoroquinolones [12, 13]. Low efficacy and frequent relapses after monotherapy led to a transition to a combined treatment regimen in 1986 [14]. However, the combination regimens also have a success below 100% because of a development of the resistance to the antibiotics [15]. In Kazakhstan the recommended therapeutic scheme is based on the WHO recommendations for the adult population, although the regiments for children and pregnant women may be changed if the drugs appear to be toxic. Despite a high incidence and defiant rate of relapses, still there is little information on the antibiotic resistance among Brucella strains circulating in Kazakhstan. A high level of bacteriological hazard posed by the live Brucella requires complying to the BSL3 standards which makes an investigation of the antibiotic resistance cumbersome, expensive or even not possible. Nevertheless the data on the antibiotic resistance are important because the resistant Brucella may spread across wide regions [16-18]. In Kazakhstan and the neighboring regions studies of the antibiotic resistance of the circulating Brucella isolates can help to improve the efficacy of treatment. In this paper we describe the results of a measurement of the antibiotic susceptibility in 329 Brucella melitensis isolates to five commonly used antibiotics.

Methods

Clinical isolates and characterization of B. melitensis

During 2008-2014 Brucella isolates were collected from patients which were seropositive to a Brucella antigen in a hemagglutination reaction with titers 1:200 and higher. Samples were collected from patients which presented in clinics with symptoms compatible with brucellosis. The blood for Brucella isolation was obtained during standard diagnostic procedures which require a bacteriological isolation of Brucella as a confirmatory test. The blood cultures were produced using the two-phase method proposed by Castaneda [19, 20]. Primary isolation and a species identification of the Brucella isolates were performed in local hospitals in 11 provinces of Kazakhstan. To confirm the identifications and for further investigation all isolates were further transferred to the Brucellosis laboratory in the Kazakh Scientific Center of Quarantine and Zoonotic Diseases (SC QZD). In total 329 isolates were collected in the SC QZD. The isolates were tested using standard procedures, e.g. CO2 requirement, production of H2S, reducing ability for aniline dyes (thionine and basic fuchsine at final concentrations 20-40 μg/ml), agglutination with specific antisera for A and M antigens and susceptibility to lysis with Tb and Weybridge phages. The species identification was confirmed using the “Bruce-ladder” multiplex PCR [21].

Determination of minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs)

MICs of tetracycline, gentamicin, doxycycline, streptomycin and rifampicin were determined using the E-test gradient strips (Biomerieux, Sweden). Suspensions of the bacteria with titers 105-106 CFU/ml were inoculated onto surfaces of Brucella agar plates with hemin and vitamin K (HiMedia Laboratories) and 5% sheep serum (Sigma-Aldrich). The MICs were determined following 48 h incubation in ambient air at 37 °C after placing of the E-test strips in the plates. The reference strains E.coli ATCC 25922 and B. melitensis 16 M were used to control performance of the test. The MIC thresholds for tetracycline, gentamicin, doxycycline and streptomycin were calculated using the guidelines from the CLSI [22]. Since these guidelines do not provide a classification category for an “intermediate” resistance, all isolates which had the MIC value above the threshold were classified as resistant. Because the threshold for rifampicin has not been established against Brucella other guidelines suitable for slow-growing bacteria (H.influenzae) were used [23]. Isolates having the rifampicin MIC at a value 1.5 μg/mL were not classified as either susceptible or resistant because in the CLSI guidelines this value falls between the categories. Different measures of the antibiotic effectiveness towards Brucella namely MIC50 and MIC90 were determined. The MIC50 and MIC90 are concentrations of the relevant antibiotics which inhibit growth of 50% of the isolates or 90% % of the isolates, respectively.

Results

All 329 isolates were found to be a single species B.melitensis by their microbiological characteristics and by a multiplex PCR. Determined ranges of MICs, MIC50 and MIC90 and the assigned classification categories on the susceptibility/resistance are listed in Table 1.
Table 1

Ranges of MICs, MIC50 and MIC90 and antibiotic resistance in 329 B. melitensis isolates

MICs range (μg/mL)Susceptibilitya and thresholds (μg/mL)MIC50 (μg/mL)MIC90 (μg/mL)Classification of isolates, No1 (%)a
SIRValueNo1 ValueNo1 SIR
rifampicin0.38-16≤12≥41.51708326123 (37.4)72 (21.9)87 (26.4)
rentamicin0.5-8≤411883318320 (97.3)9 (2.7)
streptomycin0.25-4≤80.751913327329 (100)
tetracycline0.032-0.5≤10.0941650.25324329 (100)
doxycycline0.023-0.19≤10.0472120.094319329 (100)

aDefinitions: S – susceptible, I- intermediate susceptibility, R – resistant; 1No – number of isolates

Ranges of MICs, MIC50 and MIC90 and antibiotic resistance in 329 B. melitensis isolates aDefinitions: S – susceptible, I- intermediate susceptibility, R – resistant; 1No – number of isolates All 329 strains were susceptible to streptomycin, tetracycline and doxycycline and the mentioned antibiotics exhibited high antimicrobial activity. Also 97.3% of the isolates were susceptible to gentamicin, only 2.7% were resistant to gentamicin. A high resistance rate was observed to rifampicin. Only 37.4% of the isolates were susceptible, 21.9% showed an intermediate susceptibility and 26.4% were resistant. Also 14.3% of the isolates which have MIC = 1.5 μg/mL were not classified into either category because the CLSI guidelines do not allow to unambiguously assign the category. One striking observation is that of the nine isolates resistant to gentamycin eight are also resistant to rifampicin. The MIC90 values for tetracycline and doxycycline were below the respective CLSI thresholds (25% and 9.4% of the thresholds, respectively). For streptomycin the MIC90 was 37.5% of the threshold and for gentamicin the MIC90 was of 75% of the threshold. At the same time, for rifampicin even the MIC50 exceeded the threshold indicating low susceptibility to rifampicin in the circulating Brucella isolates. Occurrence of resistant isolates differed in samples from various regions of Kazakhstan. All nine isolates which were resistant to gentamicin were collected from the South Kazakhstan. In contrast, the isolates resistant to rifampicin were found almost throughout the country: samples from 7 out of 11 provinces of Kazakhstan contained the rifampicin-resistant isolates. In the particular provinces the occurrence of the rifampicin-resistant isolates is particularly high: 73.3% in Kyzylorda, 57.1% in Zhambyl, 52.9% in Atyrau and 50% in Karaganda provinces. The same provinces also have the highest prevalence of stains with the intermediate of high resistance to rifampicin (Table 2).
Table 2

Geographical distribution of Brucella isolates and their susceptibility/resistance to gentamicin and rifampicin

RegionTotal number of isolates (T)Susceptibility to gentamicinSusceptibility to rifampicin
S (T)S (%)a R (T)R (%)a S (T)S (%)I (T)I (%)a R (T)R (%)
Akmola111000.00.01100.00.00.00.00.0
Aktibinsk771000.00.0114.3342.90.00.0
Almaty91911000.00.03942.92224.21112.1
Atyrau17171000.00.0635.3211.8952.9
East-Kaz. region26261000.00.0726.91142.3519.2
Zhambyl494183.7816.348.21122.42857.1
West-Kaz. region2626100.00.00.02492.327.70.00.0
Karagandy1616100.00.00.016.3531.3850.0
Kyzylorda3030100.00.00.0310.0413.32273.3
North-Kaz. region22100.00.00.00.00.0150.00.00.0
South-Kaz. region646398.411.63757.81117.246.3

aS(%) = S/T × 100; R (%) = R/T × 100; I (%) = I/T × 100

Geographical distribution of Brucella isolates and their susceptibility/resistance to gentamicin and rifampicin aS(%) = S/T × 100; R (%) = R/T × 100; I (%) = I/T × 100

Discussion

In our study we show that Brucella melitensis isolates in Kazakhstan are susceptible to streptomycin, doxicyclin and tetracyclin, and an absolute majority of the isolates are also susceptible to gentamycin. A very different susceptibility rate was found to rifampicin. The intermediate and full resistance to rifampicin was found in 21.9% and 26.4%, respectively. This is an important observation because rifampicin is used as the frontline antibiotic in 9 out of 17 therapeutic schemes for brucellosis in Kazakhstan. Also unexpectedly out of nine isolates resistant to gentamicin eight isolates are also resistant to rifampicin. In a search for a reason for the high occurrence of rifampicin resistance among Brucella isolates in Kazakhstan we compared our data with known geographical patterns of rifampicin resistance for other bacterial pathogens. We speculate that the resistance in Brucella develops in conjunction to a rise in multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB). Kazakhstan is among the top eight countries in the world by an incidence of MDR-TB. Also a frequency of MDR-TB is annually growing among the newly diagnosed TB cases [24]. The highest incidence of MDR-TB per 100,000 population is registered in the Atyrau, Kyzylorda, East Kazakhstan, West Kazakhstan, Almaty and Zhambyl provinces [25]. The same provinces have the highest occurrence of the resistance to rifampicin. It was discussed earlier that in regions with prevalent brucellosis there is a potential of developing of MDR-TB because of a treatment of both diseases with the same frontline antibiotics [26]. In reality, the provinces of Kazakhstan with high rates of MDR-TB also have high rates of Brucella resistance to rifampricin [27-29]. Among other countries of the world only Kyrgyzstan (which borders Kazakhstan) also has the high rates of both MDR-TB and brucellosis. Supposedly, the rifampricin treatment of brucellosis is not the only reason for an increase of MDR-TB in the mentioned countries. In Kazakhstan the treatment of brucellosis is carried out only in inpatient clinics thus ensuring compliancy to a treatment regimen. Among possible reasons for the appearance of the antibiotic-resistant Brucella isolates is an uncontrolled use of antibiotics without prescription in a population to treat influenza-like symptoms and also uncontrolled distribution of the antibiotics by local sellers (this practice was stopped by an issuance of novel regulations on sells of the antibiotics in 2016). Data on a previous treatment of TB in the population from which Brucella isolates were obtained are not available. Our study underscores a need in a comprehensive and regular monitoring of the antibiotic resistance in the circulating Brucella isolates. Given that brucellosis is a zoonotic disease there is a need to expand the studies to include the isolates from animals. The data presented in this article will help in understanding and ensuring of an adequate control on the brucellosis in the Central Eurasia.

Conclusion

This study shows that 48% of isolates of Brucella mellitensis collected from humans in Kazakhstan are resistant to rifampicin. The data reported can be used to optimize the therapy regiments.
  25 in total

1.  Increasing resistance of Brucellae to co-trimoxazole.

Authors:  A Kinsara; A Al-Mowallad; A O Osoba
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 5.191

2.  A practical method for routine blood cultures in brucellosis.

Authors:  M R CASTANEDA
Journal:  Proc Soc Exp Biol Med       Date:  1947-01

3.  Brucellosis: past, present and future.

Authors:  P Nicoletti
Journal:  Prilozi       Date:  2010

4.  In vitro activity of Brucella melitensis isolates to various antimicrobials in Turkey.

Authors:  Affan Denk; Kutbettin Demirdag; Ahmet Kalkan; Mehmet Ozden; Burhan Cetinkaya; Suleyman S Kilic
Journal:  Infect Dis (Lond)       Date:  2015-02-24

5.  Musculoskeletal involvement of brucellosis in different age groups: a study of 195 cases.

Authors:  Mehmet Faruk Geyik; Ali Gür; Kemal Nas; Remzi Cevik; Jale Saraç; Bunyamin Dikici; Celal Ayaz
Journal:  Swiss Med Wkly       Date:  2002-02-23       Impact factor: 2.193

6.  Efficacy of rifampicin plus doxycycline versus rifampicin plus quinolone in the treatment of brucellosis.

Authors:  Nese Saltoglu; Yesim Tasova; Ayse S Inal; Tugba Seki; Hasan S Aksu
Journal:  Saudi Med J       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 1.484

7.  Comparative proteome analysis of Brucella melitensis vaccine strain Rev 1 and a virulent strain, 16M.

Authors:  Michel Eschenbrenner; Mary Ann Wagner; Troy A Horn; Jo Ann Kraycer; Cesar V Mujer; Sue Hagius; Philip Elzer; Vito G DelVecchio
Journal:  J Bacteriol       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 3.490

8.  Antimicrobial susceptibilities of Brucella isolates from various clinical specimens.

Authors:  Yasemin Bayram; Hanifi Korkoca; Cenk Aypak; Mehmet Parlak; Aytekin Cikman; Selcuk Kilic; Mustafa Berktas
Journal:  Int J Med Sci       Date:  2011-03-03       Impact factor: 3.738

9.  Epidemiology of Brucellosis and Genetic Diversity of Brucella abortus in Kazakhstan.

Authors:  Elena Shevtsova; Alexandr Shevtsov; Kasim Mukanov; Maxim Filipenko; Dinara Kamalova; Igor Sytnik; Marat Syzdykov; Andrey Kuznetsov; Assel Akhmetova; Mira Zharova; Talgat Karibaev; Pavel Tarlykov; Erlan Ramanculov
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-12-01       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Perspectives for the treatment of brucellosis in the 21st century: the Ioannina recommendations.

Authors:  Javier Ariza; Mile Bosilkovski; Antonio Cascio; Juan D Colmenero; Michael J Corbel; Matthew E Falagas; Ziad A Memish; Mohammad Reza Hasanjani Roushan; Ethan Rubinstein; Nikolaos V Sipsas; Javier Solera; Edward J Young; Georgios Pappas
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 11.069

View more
  9 in total

1.  Identification, Genotyping and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing of Brucella spp. Isolated from Livestock in Egypt.

Authors:  Aman Ullah Khan; Waleed S Shell; Falk Melzer; Ashraf E Sayour; Eman Shawkat Ramadan; Mandy C Elschner; Amira A Moawad; Uwe Roesler; Heinrich Neubauer; Hosny El-Adawy
Journal:  Microorganisms       Date:  2019-11-22

2.  Epidemiologically characteristics of human brucellosis and antimicrobial susceptibility pattern of Brucella melitensis in Hinggan League of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, China.

Authors:  Hai-Tao Yuan; Cheng-Ling Wang; Li-Na Liu; Dan Wang; Dan Li; Zhen-Jun Li; Zhi-Guo Liu
Journal:  Infect Dis Poverty       Date:  2020-06-29       Impact factor: 4.520

3.  Brucella Septic Hip Arthritis: A Case Report.

Authors:  Rami Jahmani; Omar Obeidat; Dawood Yusef
Journal:  Am J Case Rep       Date:  2021-02-19

Review 4.  Rickettsia burneti and Brucella melitensis co-infection: a case report and literature review.

Authors:  Jiangqin Song; Junyang Zhou; Xiaorong Hu; Xiaolong Li; Youping Chen; Xiangyuan Yan; Weifang Zhu; Yan Ding
Journal:  BMC Microbiol       Date:  2021-10-05       Impact factor: 3.605

5.  Identifying potential natural inhibitors of Brucella melitensis Methionyl-tRNA synthetase through an in-silico approach.

Authors:  Adekunle Babajide Rowaiye; Akwoba Joseph Ogugua; Gordon Ibeanu; Doofan Bur; Mercy Titilayo Asala; Osaretin Benjamin Ogbeide; Emmanuella Oshiorenimeh Abraham; Hamzah Bundu Usman
Journal:  PLoS Negl Trop Dis       Date:  2022-03-21

6.  Using a Relative Quantitative Proteomic Method to Identify Differentially Abundant Proteins in Brucella melitensis Biovar 3 and Brucella melitensis M5-90.

Authors:  Huan Zhang; Yueli Wang; Yifan Wang; Xiaoyu Deng; Taiwang Ji; Zhongchen Ma; Ningning Yang; Mingguo Xu; Honghuan Li; Jihai Yi; Yong Wang; Yuanzhi Wang; Jinliang Sheng; Zhen Wang; Chuangfu Chen
Journal:  Front Immunol       Date:  2022-07-19       Impact factor: 8.786

7.  Antibiotic persistence of intracellular Brucella abortus.

Authors:  Selma Mode; Maren Ketterer; Maxime Québatte; Christoph Dehio
Journal:  PLoS Negl Trop Dis       Date:  2022-07-26

Review 8.  Link Between Antibiotic Persistence and Antibiotic Resistance in Bacterial Pathogens.

Authors:  Wolfgang Eisenreich; Thomas Rudel; Jürgen Heesemann; Werner Goebel
Journal:  Front Cell Infect Microbiol       Date:  2022-07-19       Impact factor: 6.073

9.  Serological and Molecular Detection of Bovine Brucellosis at Institutional Livestock Farms in Punjab, Pakistan.

Authors:  Tariq Jamil; Falk Melzer; Muhammad Saqib; Asim Shahzad; Khushal Khan Kasi; Muhammad Hammad Hussain; Imaad Rashid; Usman Tahir; Iahtasham Khan; Muhammad Haleem Tayyab; Sami Ullah; Mashkoor Mohsin; Muhammad Khalid Mansoor; Stefan Schwarz; Heinrich Neubauer
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-02-21       Impact factor: 3.390

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.