4.3 Article

Co-existence of blaOXA-23 and armA in multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii isolated from a hospital in South Korea

期刊

JOURNAL OF MEDICAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 62, 期 -, 页码 836-844

出版社

MICROBIOLOGY SOC
DOI: 10.1099/jmm.0.055384-0

关键词

-

资金

  1. Dankook University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The co-existence of carbapenemase, 16S rRNA methylase and mutated quinolone resistance-determining regions (QRDRs) can cause serious difficulty in treating infections with multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii. In this study, we aimed to determine the mechanisms of imipenem, amikacin and ciprofloxacin resistance in A. baumannii isolates with resistance to these antibiotics. A total of 31 non-duplicate isolates of amikacin- and ciprofloxacin-resistant Acinetobacter isolates were identified from April to August 2010 from a single hospital in South Korea. To assess the clonal relatedness of the 31 Acinetobacter isolates, multilocus sequence typing, network phylogenetic analysis and enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus-FOR were utilized. Detection of OXA-type carbapenemase and 16S rRNA methylase was conducted using a multiplex FOR assay. The QRDRs of the gyrA and parC genes were amplified and sequenced. The result showed that 30/31 isolates harboured the bla(OXA-23)-like carbapenemase, which made them resistant to imipenem (MICs >= 16 mu g ml(-1)). Twenty-eight of the 31 isolates were found to possess armA, a 16S rRNA methylase gene, and showed resistance to amikacin, arbekacin, gentamicin and tobramycin (MICs >256 mu g ml(-1)). All of the isolates were determined to carry QRDR mutations in both gyrA and parC: a Ser83Leu substitution in gyrA and a Ser80Leu substitution in parC, causing a ciprofloxacin MIC >= 64 mu g ml(-1). In conclusion, A. baumannii with co-existence of carbapenemase, 16S rRNA methylase and mutated QRDRs are extremely prevalent in South Korea, which may cause serious problems in the treatment of A. baumannii infections using carbapenem, amikacin and ciprofloxacin.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据