4.7 Article

Characterization of invasive isolates of Streptococcus pneumoniae among Taiwanese children

期刊

CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY AND INFECTION
卷 15, 期 11, 页码 991-996

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2009.02743.x

关键词

Children; invasive; Streptococcus pneumoniae; Taiwan; zmpD gene

资金

  1. National Science Council, Taiwan
  2. Wyeth-Ayerst (Asia) Ltd, Taiwan branch

向作者/读者索取更多资源

P>Accurate molecular surveillance is important in monitoring the dynamics of Streptococcus pneumoniae. A prospective study was conducted to collect invasive isolates of S. pneumoniae from children for genetic analysis from January 2004 to December 2006 in Taiwan. PCRs were performed to detect the zmpC and zmpD genes, both encoding a metalloprotease virulence factor in pneumococci, among these invasive isolates. During the study period, 68 invasive isolates of S. pneumoniae were obtained for analysis. Serotype 14 was the most common type isolated from children with invasive disease and was significantly associated with pneumonia (OR 3.1; 95% CI] 1.1-8.8; p 0.035). Serotype 23F was significantly associated with bacteraemia (OR 7.5; 95% CI 1.8-31.3; p 0.006). The seven-valent conjugate vaccine covered 83.8% of invasive isolates, but non-vaccine serotypes were more frequently isolated from patients with underlying diseases than from patients without underlying diseases (p 0.007 by Fisher's exact test). Clonal complexes related to international clones Spain23F ST81, Spain6B ST95, England14 ST9, Taiwan19F ST236, Taiwan23F ST242 and Colombia23F ST338 accounted for 52.9% of invasive isolates. Dissemination of the penicillin-resistant clones ST876, ST46, ST76 and ST2889, which were first identified in Taiwan, was also found; 1.5% of these invasive isolates carried the zmpC gene, and 47.1% of these invasive isolates carried the zmpD gene. In conclusion, the spread of certain international clones and some domestic antibiotic-resistant clones resulted in invasive diseases among Taiwanese children.

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