4.7 Article

Effects of phenotype and genotype on methods for detection of extended-spectrum-beta-lactamase-producing clinical isolates of Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae in Norway

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY
Volume 45, Issue 1, Pages 199-205

Publisher

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.01319-06

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Consecutive clinical isolates of Escherichia coli (n = 87) and Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 25) with reduced susceptibilities to oxyimino-cephalosporins (MICs > 1 mg/liter) from 18 Norwegian laboratories during March through October 2003 were examined for bla(TEM/SHV/CTX-M) extended-spectrum-beta-lactamase (ESBL) genes, oxyimino-cephalosporin MIC profiles, ESBL phenotypes (determined by the ESBL Etest and the combined disk and double-disk synergy [DDS] methods), and susceptibility to non-beta-lactam antibiotics. Multidrug-resistant CTX-M-15-like (n = 23) and CTX-M-9-like (n = 15) ESBLs dominated among the 50 ESBL-positive E. coli isolates. SHV-5-like (n = 9) and SHV-2-like (n = 4) ESBLs were the most prevalent in 19 ESBL-positive K pneumoniae isolates. Discrepant ESBL phenotype test results were observed for one major (CTX-M-9) and several minor (TEM-128 and SHV-2/-28) ESBL groups and in SHV-1/11-hyperproducing isolates. Negative or borderline ESBL results were observed when low-MIC oxyimino-cephalosporin substrates were used to detect clavulanic acid (CLA) synergy. CLA synergy was detected by the ESBL Etest and the DDS method but not by the combined disk method in SHV-1/11-hyperproducing strains. The DDS method revealed unexplained CLA synergy in combination with aztreonam and cefpirome in three E. coli strains. The relatively high proportion of ESBL-producing E. coli organisms with a low ceftazidime MIC in Norway emphasizes that cefpodoxime alone or both cefotaxime and ceftazidime should be used as substrates for ESBL detection.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available