4.7 Article

Outbreak of dysentery associated with ceftriaxone-resistant Shigella sonnei:: First report of plasmid-mediated CMY-2-type AmpC β-lactamase resistance in S-sonnei

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 43, 期 6, 页码 2608-2612

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.43.6.2608-2612.2005

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We document the first report of plasmid-encoded CMY-2-type AmpC beta-lactamase identified among Shigella sonnei isolates resistant to ceftriaxone and obtained after an outbreak of bacillary dysentery in Taiwan. One hundred eighty-two children in two elementary schools in Yu-Li, Taiwan, where an outbreak occurred after a typhoon hit this area in 2001, were enrolled in this study. Clinical and epidemiologic data on the infected children were collected. Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) was performed on the isolates to determine the genetic relatedness of outbreak strains. Plasmid analysis and PCR were performed to identify beta-lactamase genes responsible for ceftriaxone resistance. Forty-seven children from the two elementary schools were culture positive for S. sonnei in this outbreak. Twenty-three children were asymptomatic. Of the total isolates 55.3% were resistant to ampicillin. One hundred percent of the isolates obtained from children in school A were initially susceptible to both ampicillin and ceftriaxone. Of isolates obtained from school B 96.2% were nonsusceptible to ceftriaxone. However, two isolates from school A developed resistance to ampicillin during the course of treatment. All 18 available isolates showed closely related PFGE patterns (4, 4a, 4b, and 4c). CMY-2-type AmpC beta-lactamase was responsible for ceftriaxone resistance in ceftriaxone-non susceptible isolates; Southern blot hybridization confirmed that such a resistance gene was located on the plasmid. This is the first report of plasmid-mediated CMY-2-type AmpC beta-lactamase in S. sonnei. Ampicillin-resistant isolates can develop during the course of antibiotic treatment.

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

4.7
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