| Literature DB >> 31510095 |
Cátia Pacífico1,2, Miriam Hilbert1,2, Dmitrij Sofka1, Nora Dinhopl3, Ildiko-Julia Pap4, Christoph Aspöck2,4, Friederike Hilbert5.
Abstract
Intensive care units (ICUs) are critical locations for the transmission of pathogenic and opportunistic microorganisms. Bacteria may develop a synergistic relationship with bacteriophages and more effectively resist various stresses, enabling them to persist despite disinfection and antimicrobial treatment. We collected 77 environmental samples from the surroundings of 12 patients with infection/colonizations by Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus or Klebsiella spp in an ICU in Austria. Surface swabs were tested for lytic phages and bacterial isolates for mitomycin C-inducible prophages. No lytic bacteriophages were detected, but S. aureus was isolated from the surroundings of all patients. About 85% of the colonies isolated from surface samples were resistant to antimicrobials, with 94% of them multidrug resistant. Two inducible temperate bacteriophages-myovirus vB_EcoM_P5 and siphovirus vB_SauS_P9-were recovered from two clinical isolates. Staphylococci phage vB_SauS_P9 lysed S. aureus isolates from the surface swabs collected from the surroundings of three patients. No transductants were obtained on propagation in phage-sensitive antimicrobial-resistant isolates. The two phages were sensitive to 0.25% (v/v) of the disinfectant TPH Protect, which eliminated viable phages after 15 min. Coliphage vB_EcoM_P5 was inactivated at 70 °C and staphylococci phage vB_SauS_P9 at 60 °C after 60 min.Entities:
Keywords: Escherichia coli; Staphylococcus aureus; bacteriophages; intensive care unit; prophage induction
Year: 2019 PMID: 31510095 PMCID: PMC6780966 DOI: 10.3390/jcm8091433
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Clin Med ISSN: 2077-0383 Impact factor: 4.241
Type of sample, collection date, and number of sites analyzed for each patient (P1-P12).
| Patient ID | Type of Sample | Collection Date | Number of Sites |
|---|---|---|---|
| P1 | Gel swab | 21.02.17 | 5 |
| P2 | Gel swab | 21.02.17 | 5 |
| P3 | Gel swab | 05.04.17 | 6 |
| P4 | Gel swab | 11.05.17 | 7 |
| P5 1 | Gel swab, liquid swab | 21.06.17 | 6, 6 |
| P6 | Liquid swab | 06.07.17 | 6 |
| P7 | Liquid swab | 06.07.17 | 6 |
| P8 | Liquid swab | 06.07.17 | 6 |
| P9 | Liquid swab | 26.07.17 | 5 |
| P10 | Liquid swab | 26.07.17 | 5 |
| P11 2 | Surface wipe | 26.03.18 | 6 |
| P12 2 | Surface wipe | 26.03.18 | 8 |
1 The sites analyzed in P5 were replicated to compare both sampling methods. 2 No isolates from the patient available.
Clinical isolate, isolation source, and corresponding antibiogram.
| Patient ID | Bacterial Isolate | Isolation Source | Colony Count 2 | Antibiogram | Mitomycin C-Inducible Prophage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| P1 |
| Nose swab | +++ | Sensitive | - |
| P2 |
| Trachea secretion | +++ | P R, MXF R | - |
| P3 |
| Urine transurethral catheter | 107/mL | AM R, SAM R, CPD R, CTX R, CXM R, CIP R, CN R, TMP R | - |
| P4 |
| Urine transurethral catheter | 104/mL | AM R, SAM R | - |
| P5 |
| Urine transurethral catheter | 107/mL | AM R, TMP R | + |
| P6 |
| Trachea secretion | +++ | AM R | - |
| P7 |
| Trachea secretion | + | AM R, SAM R, CPD R, CTX R, CXM R, TMP R | - |
| P8 |
| Trachea secretion | + | AM R | - |
| P9 |
| Blood culture | Not detectable | Sensitive | + |
| P10 |
| Trachea secretion | + | AM R, SAM R, CXM R | - |
1 ESBL (extended-spectrum β-lactamase), CRE isolate; R stands for resistant. 2 Colony counts were assessed either by direct counting or by indirect quantification using one “+” to “+++”.
Antimicrobial activity of temperate phages vB_EcoM_P5 and vB_SauS_P9.
| vB_EcoM_P5 | vB_SauS_P9 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bacteria | Lysis | E.O.P. | Reference and/or Source | Bacteria | Lysis | E.O.P. | Reference and/or Source |
|
|
| ||||||
| + | 1.000 ± 0.000 | DSMZ | Surface P1 (0/9) 1 | - | - | Environment, this study | |
| - | - | ATCC | Surface P2 (0/5) | - | - | Environment, this study | |
| + | 0.005 ± 0.001 | DSM | Surface P3 (0/4) | - | - | Environment, this study | |
| - | - | DSM | Surface P4 (0/2) | - | - | Environment, this study | |
| - | - | ATCC | Surface P5 (7/11) | + | 0.142 ± 0.080–0.781 ± 0.219 | Environment, this study | |
| + | 0.009 ± 0.001 | ATCC | Surface P6 (0/8) | - | - | Environment, this study | |
| - | - | ATCC | Surface P7 (7/7) | + | 0.000 ± 0.000–0.001 ± 0.000 | Environment, this study | |
| - | - | DSM | Surface P8 (7/11) | + | 0.000 ± 0.000–0.013 ± 0.009 | Environment, this study | |
| - | - | ATCC | Surface P9 (0/5) | - | - | Environment, this study | |
| - | - | Human [ | Surface P10 (0/7) | - | - | Environment, this study | |
|
| Surface P11 (0/1) | - | - | Environment, this study | |||
| - | - | Human, this study | Surface P12 (0/3) | - | - | Environment, this study | |
| - | - | Human, this study |
| ||||
| - | - | Human, this study | + | 1.0 ± 0.00 | Food, [ | ||
| - | - | Human, this study | - | - | ATCC | ||
| - | - | Human, this study | - | - | NCTC | ||
| - | - | Human, this study |
| ||||
| - | - | Human, this study | - | - | Human, this study | ||
|
| - | - | Human, this study | ||||
| - | - | Human, this study | - | - | Human, this study | ||
|
| |||||||
| + | 0.017 ± 0.013 | Human, this study | |||||
| - | - | Human, this study | |||||
1 Number of isolates showing lysis/number of isolates tested.
Figure 1Staphylococcus aureus contamination of the environmental samples, according to the percentage of contaminated versus non-contaminated sites.
Figure 2Percentage of environmental bacteria resistant to penicillin G, erythromycin, clindamycin, and tetracycline, found in the surroundings of each patient.
Figure 3Plaque and virion morphologies of coliphage vB_EcoM_P5 (A,C) and staphylococci phage vB_SauS_P9 (B,D).
Figure 4Stability of phages vB_EcoM_P5 and vB_SauS_P9 in the presence of disinfectants (A) and increasing temperatures (B).