4.4 Article

An Escherichia coli isolate from hospital sewage carries blaNDM-1 and blaoxa-10

期刊

ARCHIVES OF MICROBIOLOGY
卷 203, 期 7, 页码 4427-4432

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00203-021-02431-2

关键词

Escherichia coli; Bla(NDM-1); Bla(OXA-10); Carbapenemase; Environmental bacteria

资金

  1. Jiangsu Modern Agriculture (Waterfowl) Industrial Technology System Disease Prevention, Control Innovation Team [JATS[2018]222]
  2. Key research and development plan of Jiangsu province [BE2019304]
  3. Study on the Target Screening of Vigorous Phage and Its Prevention and Control in Colibacillosis from the National Natural Science Foundation of China [2019.01-2021.12 U1803109]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study identified a carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacterium AH001 with multidrug resistance isolated from hospital sewage. Whole-genome sequencing showed that AH001 could not be classified by existing MLST, and its serotype could not be distinguished among O9, O89 or O168 according to O antigen prediction. This highlights the importance of environmental sources of Escherichia coli in the development and transfer of drug resistance in the hospital setting.
Carbapenems, as the last line of defense against Gram-negative bacteria, are increasingly being challenged by drug-resistant bacteria, especially Enterobacteriaceae. In this study, a carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacterium, named AH001, was isolated from hospital sewage, and a modified Hodge test confirmed that this bacterium can produce carbapenemase. Further analysis revealed that this bacterium exhibits multidrug resistance against an additional seven antibiotics. Whole-genome sequencing and analysis showed that AH001 could not be classified by existing MLST, and its serotype could not be distinguished among O9, O89 or O168 according to O antigen prediction. More attention should be given to the role of environmental sources of Escherichia coli in the development and transfer of drug resistance in the hospital environment.

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

4.4
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