4.2 Article

Diversity of Molecular Mechanisms Conferring Carbapenem Resistance to Pseudomonas aeruginosa Isolates from Saudi Arabia

Publisher

HINDAWI LTD
DOI: 10.1155/2016/4379686

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Deanship of Scientific Research at King Saud University [RGP-038]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. This study described various molecular and epidemiological characters determining antibiotic resistance patterns in Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates. Methods. A total of 34 carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosa clinical isolates were isolated from samples collected at a tertiary hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, from January to December 2011. Susceptibility testing, serotyping, molecular characterization of carbapenem resistance, and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) were performed. Results. All isolates were resistant to ceftazidime, and more than half were highly resistant (minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) > 256 mg/L). Fifteen isolates had MIC values >= 64 mg/L for any of the carbapenems examined. Vietnamese extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (VEB-1) (n = 16/34) and oxacillinase (OXA-10) (n = 14/34) were the most prevalent extended-spectrum beta-lactamase and penicillinase, respectively. Verona imipenemase (VIM-1, VIM-2, VIM-4, VIM-11, and VIM-28) and imipenemase (IMP-7) variants were found in metallo-beta-lactamase producers. A decrease in outer membrane porin gene (oprD) expression was seen in nine isolates, and an increase in efflux pump gene (MexAB) expression was detected in five isolates. Six serotypes (O:1, O: 4, O: 7, O: 10, O: 11, and O: 15) were found among the 34 isolates. The predominant serotype was O: 11 (16 isolates), followed by O: 15 (nine isolates). PFGE analysis of the 34 carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosa isolates revealed 14 different pulsotypes. Conclusions. These results revealed diverse mechanisms conferring carbapenem resistance to P. aeruginosa isolates from Saudi Arabia.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available