4.6 Article

Characterization of Streptococcus pneumoniae Macrolide Resistance and Its Mechanism in Northeast China over a 20-Year Period

期刊

MICROBIOLOGY SPECTRUM
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/spectrum.00546-22

关键词

macrolides; ermB; Streptococcus pneumoniae; multidrug resistance; antibiotic resistance; MDR

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study presents a retrospective analysis using 1,240 clinical erythromycin-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae (ERSP) isolates collected in northeastern China between January 2000 and December 2019. The serotype distribution, corresponding vaccine coverage, as well as resistance phenotypes, genes, and mechanisms to macrolide and tetracycline of these isolates were systematically described, analyzed, and discussed.
Due to the resistance of Streptococcus pneumoniae to beta-lactams, macrolides, and tetracyclines, treatment alternatives have become increasingly limited worldwide. We aim to describe the characterization of erythromycin-resistant S. pneumoniae (ERSP) strains in northeastern China over a period of 20 years. A total of 1,240 ERSP strains were collected and classified into five groups based on the ages of the patients. Etest strips and Kirby-Bauer disk diffusion were performed for drug susceptibility testing. The capsule swelling test was used for capsule typing. The phenotype of drug resistance was detected by the erythromycin and clindamycin double-disk method. The ermB, ermTR, mefA, and tetM genes were detected by PCR. Among the 1,240 ERSP strains, 510 were invasive isolates, and 730 were noninvasive isolates. The results of drug susceptibility testing showed that the rates of resistance to penicillin, amoxicillin, cefotaxime, ceftriaxone, meropenem, tetracycline, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, and chloramphenicol varied among the different age groups. 19F, 19A, 23F, 14, and 6B were the serotypes that were commonly found among ERSP strains. Among all strains, 99.03% (1,228/1,240) exhibited an MLSB (macrolide-lincosamide-streptogramin B) resistance phenotype, of which 1,221 strains displayed a constitutive MLSB (cMLSB) phenotype and 7 strains showed an inducible MLSB (iMLSB) phenotype. All of these strains carried the ermB gene. In contrast, only 0.97% of strains of M phenotypes were found to carry the mefA gene. Both the ermB and mefA genes were detected in 704 strains that exhibited multidrug resistance, whereas the ermTR gene was not detected. Furthermore, 1,185 tetracycline-resistant strains were found to carry the tetM gene. Macrolide antimicrobial drugs should be used cautiously for the empirical treatment of S. pneumoniae infections. IMPORTANCE This study presents a retrospective analysis using 1,240 clinical erythromycin-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae (ERSP) isolates collected in northeastern China between January 2000 and December 2019. The serotype distribution, corresponding vaccine coverage, as well as resistance phenotypes, genes, and mechanisms to macrolide and tetracycline of these isolates were systematically described, analyzed, and discussed. We hope that this study will inform clinicians in their respective regions when selecting antimicrobial agents. We also hope that this study is useful for researchers in related fields. Finally, we emphasize in this study that vaccination is the best preventive measure for S. pneumoniae infection considering its resistance to commonly used antibiotics. The determination of the S. pneumoniae serotype distribution also provides valuable empirical evidence for local health authorities when introducing appropriate vaccines in a specific area. This study presents a retrospective analysis using 1,240 clinical erythromycin-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae (ERSP) isolates collected in northeastern China between January 2000 and December 2019. The serotype distribution, corresponding vaccine coverage, as well as resistance phenotypes, genes, and mechanisms to macrolide and tetracycline of these isolates were systematically described, analyzed, and discussed.

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

4.6
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