Various phenotypic techniques for detection of beta-lactam resistance in Pseudomonas species and Acinetobacter species: a single-center experience

A. Ahmed, Hanan Abdellatif, A. M. Abdallah
{"title":"Various phenotypic techniques for detection of beta-lactam resistance in Pseudomonas species and Acinetobacter species: a single-center experience","authors":"A. Ahmed, Hanan Abdellatif, A. M. Abdallah","doi":"10.4103/jcmrp.jcmrp_99_21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background The World Health Organization has emphasized that the risk of antibiotic resistance of Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PSA) and Acinetobacter baumannii (ACB) is due to the extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL) and carbapenemase activity. Objectives The study was designed to describe the rates of different β-lactamases, and to assess the best phenotypic method for detection of these resistances. Methodology This cross-sectional study included 124 isolates obtained from the patients of Assiut University Hospital. Screening and phenotypic confirmatory tests for resistance were done. The study was approved and monitored by the Medical Ethics Committee, Assiut Faculty of Medicine, IRB 17101464. The antimicrobial-susceptibility tests were done by the Kirby–Bauer disk-diffusion method according to the CLSI 2019 guidelines and by automated Vitek2 Compact 15 system. Also, different phenotypic methods were used. Results The highest percentages of β-lactamase enzymes in 52 Pseudomonas isolates (53.8%) were due to both ESBL and carbapenemases (CARBA), whereas isolates with solo ESBL were 19.2% of the total isolates and the least percentages were due to CARBA. The highest percentages of β-lactamase enzymes in 72 Acinetobacter isolates (33.3%) were due to CARBA alone, whereas isolates with both ESBL and CARBA were 16.7% of the total isolates and the least percentages (5.6%) were due to ESBL. The combined-disk test had a high sensitivity and specificity in detection of ESBL and metallo-beta-lactamase (MBL) in PSA, whereas in ACB showed high sensitivity only. Conclusion The ESBL and MBL showed the highest percentage among Pseudomonas isolates, whereas among Acinetobacter isolates, the MBL showed the highest percentage. The phenotypic confirmatory tests showed high sensitivity and specificity and proved to be reliable approaches for identification of the β-lactamase resistance.","PeriodicalId":110854,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Current Medical Research and Practice","volume":"100 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Current Medical Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jcmrp.jcmrp_99_21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background The World Health Organization has emphasized that the risk of antibiotic resistance of Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PSA) and Acinetobacter baumannii (ACB) is due to the extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL) and carbapenemase activity. Objectives The study was designed to describe the rates of different β-lactamases, and to assess the best phenotypic method for detection of these resistances. Methodology This cross-sectional study included 124 isolates obtained from the patients of Assiut University Hospital. Screening and phenotypic confirmatory tests for resistance were done. The study was approved and monitored by the Medical Ethics Committee, Assiut Faculty of Medicine, IRB 17101464. The antimicrobial-susceptibility tests were done by the Kirby–Bauer disk-diffusion method according to the CLSI 2019 guidelines and by automated Vitek2 Compact 15 system. Also, different phenotypic methods were used. Results The highest percentages of β-lactamase enzymes in 52 Pseudomonas isolates (53.8%) were due to both ESBL and carbapenemases (CARBA), whereas isolates with solo ESBL were 19.2% of the total isolates and the least percentages were due to CARBA. The highest percentages of β-lactamase enzymes in 72 Acinetobacter isolates (33.3%) were due to CARBA alone, whereas isolates with both ESBL and CARBA were 16.7% of the total isolates and the least percentages (5.6%) were due to ESBL. The combined-disk test had a high sensitivity and specificity in detection of ESBL and metallo-beta-lactamase (MBL) in PSA, whereas in ACB showed high sensitivity only. Conclusion The ESBL and MBL showed the highest percentage among Pseudomonas isolates, whereas among Acinetobacter isolates, the MBL showed the highest percentage. The phenotypic confirmatory tests showed high sensitivity and specificity and proved to be reliable approaches for identification of the β-lactamase resistance.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
检测假单胞菌和不动杆菌中β -内酰胺耐药性的各种表型技术:单中心经验
世界卫生组织强调铜绿假单胞菌(PSA)和鲍曼不动杆菌(ACB)的耐药风险是由于其广谱β-内酰胺酶(ESBL)和碳青霉烯酶活性。目的本研究旨在描述不同β-内酰胺酶的耐药率,并评估检测这些耐药的最佳表型方法。方法本横断面研究包括从阿西尤特大学医院患者中分离的124株。进行了耐药性筛选和表型确证试验。该研究由阿西尤特医学院医学伦理委员会批准和监督,IRB 17101464。根据CLSI 2019指南,采用Kirby-Bauer圆盘扩散法和自动Vitek2 Compact 15系统进行抗菌药敏试验。此外,还采用了不同的表型方法。结果52株假单胞菌中β-内酰胺酶含量最高的菌株(53.8%)为ESBL和碳青霉烯酶(CARBA)所致,而单独存在ESBL的菌株占总菌株的19.2%,CARBA所致比例最低。72株不动杆菌中β-内酰胺酶含量最高的是CARBA(33.3%),而同时存在ESBL和CARBA的分离株占总分离株的16.7%,最低的是ESBL(5.6%)。联合圆盘试验对PSA中ESBL和金属内酰胺酶(MBL)的检测具有较高的敏感性和特异性,而对ACB仅具有较高的敏感性。结论ESBL和MBL在假单胞菌中所占比例最高,在不动杆菌中所占比例最高。表型验证试验具有较高的敏感性和特异性,是鉴定β-内酰胺酶耐药的可靠方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Comparative Study Between the Efficacy of Oral Verapamil and Bisoprolol on Reduction of Intraoperative Bleeding during Endoscopic Sinus Surgery under General Anesthesia Assessment of Cognitive Functions in Bipolar Disorder Patients Assessment of Acne Severity in Adult Female Acne Patients in Relation to BMI CD 11b and CD56 As Prognostic Markers in Acute Myeloid Leukemia Effect of Intrathecal Dexamethasone on Intra-operative Hemodynamics in Elderly Patients Undergoing Urologic Endoscopic Surgery
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1