4.5 Article

Isolation, phenotypic and genotypic characterization of Escherichia coli from the bloodstream samples in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

期刊

JOURNAL OF KING SAUD UNIVERSITY SCIENCE
卷 32, 期 2, 页码 1464-1469

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jksus.2019.11.043

关键词

E. coli; Bacteremia; ST131; Antimicrobial resistance; Virulence capacity; ESBL

资金

  1. Deanship of Scientific Research at King Saud University [RG-1440-053]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bacteraemia is an international threat caused by extra-intestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli (ExPEC). Recently, the antimicrobial resistance of ExPEC has increased substantially, and this is attributed to the dissemination of E. coli. ST131 clone. The present study explored the antimicrobial susceptibility patterns, extended spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) carriage, virulence capacity and the prevalence of ST131 clone in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Thirty-one E. coli. blood isolates, collected between January 2018 and March 2018, were used. The prevalence of ST131 clone was determined based on the PCR assays. Twenty-eight (90.3%) of all tested isolates were resistant to ampicillin, while only 1 isolate (3.2%) showed resistance to imipenem. Sixteen (51.6%) of the all isolates were ESBL producers, with CTX-M-15 being the predominant ESBL type. The virulence potential was higher among ESBL-producing isolates. Overall, seventeen (54.8%) isolates belonged to the ST131 clone. ST131 isolates were associated with increased antibiotic resistance; ESBL carriage and virulence capacity compared to non ST131isolates. This study reported the high levels of antimicrobial resistance and ESBL carriage among ExPEC blood isolates. It is concluded that the prevalence of ST131 clone among E. coli. blood population is high locally, and found high virulence potential and antimicrobial resistance levels among ST131 isolates. These might drive ST131 success as a major cause of bacteraemia worldwide. (C) 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of King Saud University.

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

4.5
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