S'abonner

Phenotypic and genotypic detection of ESBL mediated cephalosporin resistance in Klebsiella pneumoniae: Emergence of high resistance against cefepime, the fourth generation cephalosporin - 16/08/11

Doi : 10.1016/j.jinf.2005.12.001 
S.S. Grover a, Meenakshi Sharma a, , D. Chattopadhya b, Hema Kapoor c, S.T. Pasha a, Gajendra Singh d
a Department of Biochemistry–Biotechnology, National Institute of Communicable Diseases, 22-Shamnath Marg, New Delhi-110054, India 
b Department of Microbiology, National Institute of Communicable Diseases, 22-Shamnath Marg, New Delhi-110054, India 
c Department of Microbiology, Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi-110029, India 
d Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, Punjab-143005, India 

Corresponding author. Indian Council of Medical Research, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi-110029, India. Tel.: +91 11 26589544; fax: +91 11 26588381.

Summary

Objectives

Cephalosporins belonging to second and third generation are commonly used in India for the treatment of Klebsiella pneumoniae. Report on resistance among K. pneumoniae strains to second and third generation cephalosporins are on rise in this country, which has been attributed to emergence of strains expressing extended-spectrum β-lactamases (ESBLs). The aim of this study was to evaluate the in vitro susceptibility of K. pneumoniae to broad-spectrum cephalosporins particularly to cefepime, a recently introduced fourth generation cephalosporin in relation to ESBL production.

Methods

This study has been carried out in two phases among K. pneumoniae strains isolated between October 2001 and September 2002 (phase I, before marketing of cefepime in India) and between August 2003 and July 2004 (phase II, after marketing of cefepime in India). Minimum Inhibitory Concentration (MIC) was determined by a commercial strip containing gradient of antimicrobials (Strip E-test). Detection for ESBL production was carried out by DDST, E-test ESBL and PCR.

Results

Antimicrobial resistance profile of K. pneumoniae strains to five cephalosporins as analyzed by WHONET 5 identified 15 different resistance profiles among the 108 phase I isolates, ranging from resistance to none (19.44%) to all the five cephalosporin (8.33%) and eight different resistance profiles among the 99 phase II isolates, ranging from resistance to none (9.1%) to all the five cephalosporins (36.4%). Among the 108 phase I isolates a total of 71 (65.72%) and out of 99 phase II isolates, a total of 87 (88.0%) could be identified as ESBL producers. Among the isolates, regardless of the phase of the isolation, those characterized by production of ESBL showed overall higher frequency of resistance to cephalosporins (range 19.7–85.9% and 51.7–100% in phase I and phase II, respectively) compared to those for ESBL non-producers (range 0–13.5% and 0–25% in phase I and phase II, respectively). Ten randomly selected isolates from the most common resistance phenotypes probably belonged to a single strain as evident by MIC patterns, genotypic characterization and resistance profile to non-cephalosporin group of antimicrobials thereby pointing out the possibility of an outbreak.

Conclusions

PCR may be regarded as a reliable method for detection of ESBL since in addition to the strains that could be identified as ESBL producers by DDST and E-test ESBL; PCR could demonstrate ESBL production among additional 32 strains (15 in phase I and 17 in phase II). Continued uses of cephalosporin group appear to be a potential risk factor for emergence of ESBL producing K. pneumoniae strains. In addition, as noted in the present study, the rise of resistance to cefepime that has been introduced recently in this country for therapeutic use could be of concern.

Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.

Keywords : Klebsiella pneumoniae, Cephalosporin, ESBL, PCR


Plan


© 2006  The British Infection Society. Publié par Elsevier Masson SAS. Tous droits réservés.
Ajouter à ma bibliothèque Retirer de ma bibliothèque Imprimer
Export

    Export citations

  • Fichier

  • Contenu

Vol 53 - N° 4

P. 279-288 - octobre 2006 Retour au numéro
Article précédent Article précédent
  • Colistin and rifampicin in the treatment of nosocomial infections from multiresistant Acinetobacter baumannii
  • Said Motaouakkil, Boubaker Charra, Abdelhamid Hachimi, Hicham Nejmi, Abdellatif Benslama, Naima Elmdaghri, Habiba Belabbes, Mohamed Benbachir
| Article suivant Article suivant
  • Systemic inflammatory response syndrome in adult patients with nosocomial bloodstream infection due to Pseudomonas aeruginosa
  • Dominique M. Vandijck, Johan M. Decruyenaere, Stijn I. Blot

Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.

Déjà abonné à cette revue ?

Mon compte


Plateformes Elsevier Masson

Déclaration CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM est déclaré à la CNIL, déclaration n° 1286925.

En application de la loi nº78-17 du 6 janvier 1978 relative à l'informatique, aux fichiers et aux libertés, vous disposez des droits d'opposition (art.26 de la loi), d'accès (art.34 à 38 de la loi), et de rectification (art.36 de la loi) des données vous concernant. Ainsi, vous pouvez exiger que soient rectifiées, complétées, clarifiées, mises à jour ou effacées les informations vous concernant qui sont inexactes, incomplètes, équivoques, périmées ou dont la collecte ou l'utilisation ou la conservation est interdite.
Les informations personnelles concernant les visiteurs de notre site, y compris leur identité, sont confidentielles.
Le responsable du site s'engage sur l'honneur à respecter les conditions légales de confidentialité applicables en France et à ne pas divulguer ces informations à des tiers.


Tout le contenu de ce site: Copyright © 2024 Elsevier, ses concédants de licence et ses contributeurs. Tout les droits sont réservés, y compris ceux relatifs à l'exploration de textes et de données, a la formation en IA et aux technologies similaires. Pour tout contenu en libre accès, les conditions de licence Creative Commons s'appliquent.