4.7 Article

High Frequency of Rifampin Resistance Identified in an Epidemic Clostridium difficile Clone from a Large Teaching Hospital

Journal

CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Volume 48, Issue 4, Pages 425-429

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1086/596315

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [T32 AI007333]
  2. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases [K24 AI52788]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Rifampin is used as adjunctive therapy for Clostridium difficile-associated disease, and the drug's derivative, rifaximin, has emerged as an attractive antimicrobial for treatment of C. difficile-associated disease. Rifampin resistance in C. difficile strains has been reported to be uncommon. Methods. We examined the prevalence of rifampin resistance among 470 C. difficile isolates (51.1% during 2001-2002 and 48.9% during 2005) from a large teaching hospital. Rifampin sensitivity was performed using E-test. The epidemic BI/NAP1 C. difficile clone was identified by tcdC genotyping and multilocus variable number of tandem repeats analysis. A 200-base pair fragment of the rpoB gene was sequenced for 102 isolates. Data on rifamycin exposures were obtained for all patients. Results. Rifampin resistance was observed in 173 (36.8%) of 470 recovered isolates and 167 (81.5%) of 205 of epidemic clone isolates (P < .001). Six rpoB genotypes were associated with rifampin resistance. Of 8 patients exposed to rifamycins, 7 had rifampin-resistant C. difficile, compared with 166 of 462 unexposed patients (relative risk, 2.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.8-3.3). Conclusions. Rifampin resistance is common among epidemic clone C. difficile isolates at our institution. Exposure to rifamycins before the development of C. difficile-associated disease was a risk factor for rifampin-resistant C. difficile infection. The use of rifaximin may be limited for treatment of C. difficile-associated disease at our institution.

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