| Literature DB >> 31496764 |
Ping Cheng1, Fulei Li1, Ruimeng Liu1, Yuqi Yang1, Tianshi Xiao1, Muhammad Ishfaq1, Guofeng Xu2, Xiuying Zhang1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This retrospective study was conducted to determine the prevalence and molecular epidemiology characteristics of carbapenem-resistant Escherichia coli (CRE).Entities:
Keywords: Escherichia coli; NDM-1; carbapenem-resistant; fitness cost
Year: 2019 PMID: 31496764 PMCID: PMC6697665 DOI: 10.2147/IDR.S208122
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Infect Drug Resist ISSN: 1178-6973 Impact factor: 4.003
Figure 1Sample collection sites in the map of Heilongjiang province. Numbers within pointers denote the number of E. coli isolated from each area.
Resistance rates of E. coli of different origin against 22 antimicrobial agents
| Antimicrobial agents | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of resistant isolates | Percentage (%) | Number of resistant isolates | Percentage (%) | ||
| AMX | 464 | 95.1 | 102 | 97.1 | >0.05 |
| AMC | 224 | 45.9 | 74 | 70.5 | <0.01** |
| CEF | 212 | 43.4 | 72 | 68.6 | <0.01** |
| CRO | 220 | 45.1 | 79 | 75.2 | <0.01** |
| CTX | 188 | 38.5 | 53 | 50.5 | <0.05* |
| CAZ | 168 | 34.4 | 65 | 61.9 | <0.01** |
| FOX | 129 | 26.4 | 34 | 32.4 | >0.05 |
| ATM | 193 | 39.5 | 72 | 68.6 | <0.01** |
| IPM | 6 | 1.2 | 11 | 10.5 | <0.01** |
| MEM | 10 | 2.0 | 12 | 11.4 | <0.01** |
| ETP | 13 | 2.7 | 15 | 14.3 | <0.01** |
| GEN | 310 | 63.5 | 70 | 66.7 | >0.05 |
| AKN | 124 | 25.4 | 28 | 26.7 | >0.05 |
| TET | 463 | 94.9 | 99 | 94.3 | >0.05 |
| DOX | 402 | 82.3 | 86 | 81.9 | >0.05 |
| CHL | 425 | 87.1 | 90 | 85.7 | >0.05 |
| FLO | 465 | 95.3 | 87 | 82.9 | <0.01** |
| ENR | 397 | 81.4 | 62 | 59.1 | <0.01** |
| CIP | 380 | 77.9 | 56 | 53.3 | <0.01** |
| SXT | 472 | 96.7 | 100 | 95.2 | >0.05 |
| COL | 10 | 2.1 | 24 | 22.9 | <0.01** |
| TGC | 7 | 1.4 | 29 | 27.6 | <0.01** |
Notes: The values of *P<0.05 were considered significant, and values of **P<0.01 were considered markedly significant.
Abbreviations: AMX, amocicillin; AMC, amocicillin/clavulanic acid; CEF, ceftiofur; CRO, ceftriaxone; CTX, cefotaxime; CAZ, ceftazidime; FOX, cefoxitin; ATM, aztreonam; IPM, imipenem; MEM, meropenem; ETP, ertapenem; GEN, gentamicin; AKN, amikacin; TET, tetracycline; DOX, doxycycline; CHL, chloramphenicol; FLO, florfenicol; ENR, enrofloxacin; CIP, ciprofloxacin; SXT, sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim; COL, colistin; TGC, tigecycline.
Antimicrobial susceptibility of CRE strains to carbapenems antibiotic
| Antimicrobial agents | Number (%) of resistant isolates | CRE isolated from pigs (n=22) | CRE isolated from river (n=18) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIC (μg/mL) | Number (%) of resistant isolates | MIC (μg/mL) | Number (%) of resistant isolates | ||||||
| Range | MIC50 | MIC90 | Range | MIC50 | MIC90 | ||||
| IPM | 17 (42.5) | 0.5–16 | 1 | 16 | 6 (27.3) | 0.5–64 | 4 | 32 | 11 (61.1) |
| MEM | 22 (55.0) | 0.5–16 | 2 | 16 | 10 (45.5) | 0.5–128 | 8 | 128 | 12 (66.7) |
| ETP | 28 (70.0) | 0.5–32 | 2 | 32 | 13 (59.1) | 1–256 | 8 | 128 | 15 (83.3) |
Abbreviations: IPM, imipenem; MEM, meropenem; ETP, ertapenem.
Percentages of antimicrobial resistance in CRE of different origins
| Antimicrobial agents | CRE isolated from pigs (n=22) | CRE isolated from river (n=18) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of resistant isolates | Percentage (%) | Number of resistant isolates | Percentage (%) | ||
| AMX | 22 | 100 | 18 | 100 | >0.05 |
| AMC | 20 | 90.9 | 17 | 94.4 | >0.05 |
| CEF | 21 | 95.5 | 17 | 94.4 | >0.05 |
| CRO | 21 | 95.5 | 18 | 100 | >0.05 |
| CTX | 20 | 90.9 | 16 | 88.9 | >0.05 |
| CAZ | 19 | 86.4 | 14 | 77.8 | <0.05* |
| FOX | 13 | 59.1 | 16 | 88.9 | <0.01** |
| ATM | 9 | 40.9 | 14 | 77.8 | <0.01** |
| IPM | 6 | 27.3 | 11 | 61.1 | <0.01** |
| MEM | 10 | 45.5 | 12 | 66.7 | <0.01** |
| ETP | 13 | 59.1 | 15 | 83.3 | <0.01** |
| GEN | 18 | 81.8 | 16 | 88.9 | <0.05* |
| AKN | 11 | 50 | 9 | 50 | >0.05 |
| TET | 21 | 95.5 | 16 | 88.9 | <0.05* |
| DOX | 19 | 86.4 | 10 | 55.6 | <0.01** |
| CHL | 21 | 95.5 | 17 | 94.4 | >0.05 |
| FLO | 19 | 86.4 | 15 | 83.3 | >0.05 |
| ENR | 19 | 86.4 | 8 | 44.4 | <0.01** |
| CIP | 15 | 68.2 | 7 | 38.9 | <0.01** |
| SXT | 21 | 95.5 | 18 | 100 | >0.05 |
| COL | 2 | 9.1 | 2 | 11.1 | >0.05 |
| TGC | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | >0.05 |
Notes: The values of *P<0.05 were considered significant, and values of **P<0.01 were considered markedly significant.
Abbreviations: CRE, carbapenem-resistant Escherichia coli.; AMX, amocicillin; AMC, amocicillin/clavulanic acid; CEF, ceftiofur; CRO, ceftriaxone; CTX, cefotaxime; CAZ, ceftazidime; FOX, cefoxitin; ATM, aztreonam; IPM, imipenem; MEM, meropenem; ETP, ertapenem; GEN, gentamicin; AKN, amikacin; TET, tetracycline; DOX, doxycycline; CHL, chloramphenicol; FLO, florfenicol; ENR, enrofloxacin; CIP, ciprofloxacin; SXT, sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim; COL, colistin; TGC, tigecycline.
Figure 2The molecular characteristics of CRE isolates.
Abbreviations: PG, phylogenetic group; CRE, carbapenem-resistant Escherichia coli.
The characteristics of 5 NDM-1 positive E. coli and their transconjugants
| MIC(μg/ml) | Resistance genes | Plasmid type/transfer frequency | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ETP | IPM | MEM | |||
| 256 | 16 | 128 | 3.7×10−3 | ||
| 256 | 32 | 64 | IncA/C | ||
| 128 | 64 | 128 | 4.6×10−5 | ||
| 128 | 32 | 64 | IncFII | ||
| 128 | 16 | 64 | 4.2×10−4 | ||
| 64 | 32 | 32 | IncA/C | ||
| 64 | 8 | 32 | 8.6×10−5 | ||
| 32 | 8 | 16 | IncX3 | ||
| 128 | 32 | 32 | 2.6×10−2 | ||
| 256 | 64 | 32 | IncX3 | ||
Abbreviations: IPM, imipenem; MEM, meropenem; ETP, ertapenem.
Figure 3The growth curves of pMD18-T/DH5α and pMD18-T/NP-NDM-1/DH5α.
Figure 4Relative fitness of pMD18-T/NP-NDM-1/DH5α. A relative fitness of 1 indicates that the harboring NDM-1 undergo no fitness cost, whereas a ratio of greater than or less than 1 indicates increased or decreased fitness. Data are means±SD (error bars).
Figure 5Average time–kill curve of imipenem against 5 isolates of CRE. Data are means±SD (error bars).
Abbreviations: CRE, carbapenem-resistant Escherichia coli; NDM, New Delhi metallo-lactamase.
Prevalence of CRE isolates in fecal samples of pigs and water samples from different regions of Heilongjiang province
| Yichun | Hegan | Jiamusi | Jixi | Mudanjiang | Harbin | Suihua | Daqing | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Swine | |||||||||
| N collected samples | 57 | 63 | 71 | 60 | 55 | 152 | 103 | 69 | 630 |
| N isolated | 44 | 44 | 45 | 45 | 47 | 130 | 79 | 54 | 488 |
| N CRE (percentage) | 3 (6.82) | 0 (0) | 4 (8.89) | 0 (0) | 2 (4.26) | 7 (5.38) | 4 (5.06) | 2 (3.70) | 22 (4.51) |
| N NDM-positive | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Water | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | |
| N collected samples | 133 | 133 | |||||||
| N isolated | 105 | 105 | |||||||
| N CRE (percentage) | 18 (17.14) | 18 (17.14) | |||||||
| N NDM-positive | 5 |
Abbreviations: N, number of; ND, not determined.