| Literature DB >> 31920349 |
Arezoo Mirzaei1, Mehri Habibi1, Saeid Bouzari1, Mohammad Reza Asadi Karam1.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Proteus mirabilis is one of the most important agents of urinary tract infection (UTI). As there are limited data abou the pathogenicity P. mirabilis isolated from Iran, we investigated the virulence characteristics and antibiotic resistance in the isolates. Finally, the genotypic patterns were evaluated by Pulse field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).Entities:
Keywords: MDR; PFGE; Proteus mirabilis; antibiotic resistance; urinary tract infection; virulence characteristics
Year: 2019 PMID: 31920349 PMCID: PMC6938180 DOI: 10.2147/IDR.S230303
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Infect Drug Resist ISSN: 1178-6973 Impact factor: 4.003
Oligonucleotide Primers Used for PCR Amplification
| Gene | Primer Sequence (5′-3′) | Product (bp) | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| F: ATG AAA TTA AAT AAA TTA GC | 525 | This study | |
| F: ATG TTT ATA TTT AAA CGA TT | 825 | This study | |
| F: ATG AAA AGA AAA GTT ATA GC | 540 | This study | |
| F: CTG CGG CTT TAG TAT TTG GT | 504 | This study | |
| F: CAA TTT CAG CAC CTA ATA ACC C | 636 | This study | |
| F: TAT CGC AGA ACT GAT CAC TCG | 540 | This study | |
| F: ATG GCA CAA GTC ATT AAT | 1095 | This study | |
| F: AGA ATA TAA TCA ACC ACT GCG TA | 514 | This study | |
| F: ATA GTC ACG CCA AAT AAC GAA | 971 | This study | |
| F: AGAGGATTTCTCACGCCAGG | 527 | ||
| F: GGMATHGAAATTCGCCACTG | 264 | ||
| F: GCAAGTTCATTGAACAGGGT | 428 | ||
| F: AACTGCTTGAGCCCGTAGAT | 596 | ||
| F: TTGCGATGCTCTATGAGTGGCTA | 482 |
Figure 1Distribution of P. mirabilis isolates according to the age and gender of UTI patients.
Hemagglutination Patterns of the P. mirabilis Isolates
| Human Blood Group A | Guinea Pig Erythrocyte | Chicken Erythrocyte | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without mannose | With mannose | Without mannose | With mannose | Without mannose | With mannose |
| ++ | ++ | ++ | ++ | + | + |
Notes: ++: Strong hemagglutination; +: Weak hemagglutination.
Different Patterns of Antibiotic Resistance Among the Isolates
| Pattern (P.M) | Antimicrobial Agents | No. of Isolates |
|---|---|---|
| P.M1 | Sensitive to all | 27 |
| P.M2 | COT | 24 |
| P.M3 | AMX, COT | 19 |
| P.M4 | AMX | 9 |
| P.M5 | AMX, CAZ, CRO, CPM, ATM, CIP, NOR, TOB, COT | 7 |
| P.M6 | IMP | 3 |
| P.M7 | IMP, COT | 3 |
| P.M8 | AMX, CIP, NOR, TOB, COT | 2 |
| P.M9 | AMX, IMP, COT | 2 |
| P.M10 | AMX, CIP | 2 |
| P.M11 | MEM | 2 |
| P.M12 | AMX, CAZ, CRO, CPM, ATM, AMC, CIP, NOR, TOB, COT | 1 |
| P.M13 | AMX, CAZ, CRO, CPM, ATM, TOB, COT | 1 |
| P.M14 | TOB, COT | 1 |
| P.M15 | AMX, CAZ, CRO, CPM, ATM, IMP | 1 |
| P.M16 | AMX, IMP, CIP, NOR, TOB, COT | 1 |
| P.M17 | AMX, CAZ, MEM, CIP, NOR, COT | 1 |
| P.M18 | AMX, CAZ, CRO, CPM, ATM, AMC, MEM, IMP, CIP, NOR, TOB, COT | 1 |
| P.M19 | IMI, CIP, NOR, COT | 1 |
| P.M20 | AMX, CIP, NOR, COT | 1 |
| P.M21 | AMX, CAZ, AMC, MEM, IMP | 1 |
Abbreviations: AMX, Amoxicillin; COT, Cotrimoxazole; CAZ, Ceftazidime; CRO, Ceftriaxone; CPM, Cefpodoxime; ATM, Aztreonam; AMC, Amoxicillin-clavulanic acid; CIP, Ciprofloxacin; NOR, Norfloxacin; TOB, Tobramycin; IMP, Imipenem; MEM, Meropenem.
Distribution of Antibiotic Resistance According to Inpatients and Outpatients
| Antibiotics | Inpatient, n=77 No (%) | Outpatient, n=33 No (%) | Total, n=110 No (%) | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AMX | 35 (45.5) | 14 (42.4) | 49 (44.5) | NS |
| CAZ | 13 (16.9) | 0 | 13 (11.8) | NS |
| CRO | 11 (14.3) | 0 | 11 (10) | 0.000 |
| CPM | 11 (14.3) | 0 | 11 (10) | 0.000 |
| ATM | 11 (14.3) | 0 | 11 (10) | 0.000 |
| AMC | 3 (3.9) | 0 | 3 (2.7) | 0.000 |
| COT | 51 (66.2) | 14 (42.2) | 65 (59.1) | 0.026 |
| TOB | 14 (18.2) | 0 | 14 (12.7) | 0.000 |
| CIP | 17 (22.1) | 0 | 17 (15.5) | 0.000 |
| NOR | 15 (19.5) | 0 | 15 (13.6) | 0.000 |
| IMP | 8 (10.4) | 5 (15.2) | 13 (11.8) | NS |
| MEM | 4 (5.2) | 1 (3) | 5 (4.5) | NS |
| MDR | 16 (20.8) | 0 (0) | 16 (14.6) | 0.000 |
Abbreviations: AMX, Amoxicillin; COT, Cotrimoxazole; CAZ, Ceftazidime; CRO, Ceftriaxone; CPM, Cefpodoxime; ATM, Aztreonam; AMC, Amoxicillin-clavulanic acid; CIP, Ciprofloxacin; NOR, Norfloxacin; TOB, Tobramycin; IMP, Imipenem; MEM, Meropenem; NS, Not significant.
Relationship Between Antimicrobial Resistance and Biofilm Formation in P. mirabilis Isolates
| Antimicrobial Agents | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Biofilm Severity | AMX No (%) | CAZ No (%) | CRO No (%) | CPM No (%) | AMC No (%) | MEM No (%) | ATM No (%) | IMP No (%) | CIP No (%) | NOR No (%) | TOB No (%) | COT No (%) |
| Strong | 38 (48.1) | 10 (12.7) | 9 (11.4) | 9 (11.4) | 3 (3.8) | 3 (3.8) | 9 (11.4) | 12 (15.2) | 14 (17.7) | 12 (15.2) | 12 (15.2) | 45 (57) |
| Moderate | 8 (33.3) | 3 (12.5) | 2 (8.3) | 2 (8.3) | 0 (0) | 2 (8.3) | 2 (8.3) | 1 (4.1) | 3 (12.5) | 3 (12.5) | 2 (8.3) | 16 (66.7) |
| Weak | 3 (42.9) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 4 (57.1) |
Abbreviations: AMX, Amoxicillin; COT, Cotrimoxazole; CAZ, Ceftazidime; CRO, Ceftriaxone; CPM, Cefpodoxime; ATM, Aztreonam; AMC, Amoxicillin-clavulanic acid; CIP, Ciprofloxacin; NOR, Norfloxacin; TOB, Tobramycin; IMP, Imipenem; MEM, Meropenem.
Prevalence of Antimicrobial Resistance Among ESBL-Positive and ESBL-Negative Isolates
| Antibiotics | ESBL+, n=11 No (%) | ESBL-, n=99 No (%) | Total, n=110 No (%) | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AMX | 11 (100) | 38 (38.4) | 49 (44.5) | 0.000 |
| CAZ | 11 (100) | 2 (2) | 13 (11.8) | 0.000 |
| COT | 10 (90.9) | 55 (55.6) | 65 (59.1) | 0.026 |
| TOB | 10 (90.9) | 4 (4) | 14 (12.7) | 0.000 |
| CIP | 9 (81.8) | 8 (8.1) | 17 (15.5) | 0.000 |
| NOR | 9 (81.8) | 6 (6.1) | 15 (13.6) | 0.000 |
| IMP | 2 (18.2) | 11 (11.1) | 13 (11.8) | NS |
| MEM | 1 (9.1) | 4 (4) | 5 (4.5) | NS |
| AMC | 2 (18.2) | 1 (1) | 3 (2.7) | 0.026 |
| MDR | 10 (90.9) | 6 (6.1) | 16 (14.5) | 0.000 |
Abbreviations: AMX, Amoxicillin; CAZ, Ceftazidime; COT, Cotrimoxazole; TOB, Tobramycin; CIP, Ciprofloxacin; NOR, Norfloxacin; IMP, Imipenem; MEM, Meropenem; AMC, Amoxicillin-clavulanic acid; NS, Not significant.
Figure 2PFGE results of the selected P. mirabilis isolates. Dendrogram of PFGE was constructed based on UPGMA by using Dice coefficient with a 1.0% band position tolerance. The scores above the dendrogram show the percentage of similarity, and the solid line indicates 80% similarity.
Notes: P1-P4, Pulsotypes 1–4.