Cargando…

Difference in Susceptibility Between Carbapenemase- and Non–Carbapenemase-Producing Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae

Background: Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) remain among the most urgent infectious threats according to the CDC Threats Reports. Although focus has often been placed on carbapenemase-producing phenotypes, there is increasing interest in distinguishing the optimal treatment and outcome...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Clark, Justin, Burgess, David
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cambridge University Press 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9551530/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ash.2021.136
_version_ 1784806122800021504
author Clark, Justin
Burgess, David
author_facet Clark, Justin
Burgess, David
author_sort Clark, Justin
collection PubMed
description Background: Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) remain among the most urgent infectious threats according to the CDC Threats Reports. Although focus has often been placed on carbapenemase-producing phenotypes, there is increasing interest in distinguishing the optimal treatment and outcomes of carbapenemase-producing (CP) and non–carbapenemase-producing (NCP) CRE. We compare antimicrobial susceptibility patterns between CP-CRE and NCP-CRE isolated from patients at our academic medical center. Methods: All CRE isolates of Enterobacter cloacae, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella aerogenes, K. oxytoca, and K. pneumoniae in adult inpatients from 2010 to 2019 were included in this study. Susceptibility testing was performed using the BD Phoenix Automated System (BD Diagnostics, Sparks, MD). CLSI susceptibility break points were utilized in the susceptibility analyses of all antimicrobials tested. To determine carbapenemase production, isolates resistant only to ertapenem were considered NCP-CRE, and those resistant to both ertapenem and meropenem were considered CP-CRE. Statistical comparisons of susceptibility profiles were performed using either the χ(2) test or the Fisher exact test. All data preprocessing and statistical analyses were performed using Python software. Results: Over the decade, we identified 291 CRE isolates (216 isolates resistant only to ertapenem and 75 resistant to ertapenem and meropenem). The ertapenem-resistant–only phenotype comprises ~66% of the total CRE population and is largely composed of E. cloacae (67%). As expected, most β-lactam susceptibilities were negligibly low between the 2 groups; however, other clinically relevant antimicrobials (aminoglycosides, fluoroquinolones, and sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim) exhibited starkly different susceptibility profiles (P value Conclusions: These findings suggest that the most predominant CRE phenotype at our institution is not carbapenemase production. Evaluation of outcomes between CP- and NCP-CRE should be pursued further. The large differences in the MIC distributions may lead to differing outcomes for the affected patients. Funding: No Disclosures: None
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9551530
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Cambridge University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95515302022-10-12 Difference in Susceptibility Between Carbapenemase- and Non–Carbapenemase-Producing Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae Clark, Justin Burgess, David Antimicrob Steward Healthc Epidemiol Mdr Gnr Background: Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) remain among the most urgent infectious threats according to the CDC Threats Reports. Although focus has often been placed on carbapenemase-producing phenotypes, there is increasing interest in distinguishing the optimal treatment and outcomes of carbapenemase-producing (CP) and non–carbapenemase-producing (NCP) CRE. We compare antimicrobial susceptibility patterns between CP-CRE and NCP-CRE isolated from patients at our academic medical center. Methods: All CRE isolates of Enterobacter cloacae, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella aerogenes, K. oxytoca, and K. pneumoniae in adult inpatients from 2010 to 2019 were included in this study. Susceptibility testing was performed using the BD Phoenix Automated System (BD Diagnostics, Sparks, MD). CLSI susceptibility break points were utilized in the susceptibility analyses of all antimicrobials tested. To determine carbapenemase production, isolates resistant only to ertapenem were considered NCP-CRE, and those resistant to both ertapenem and meropenem were considered CP-CRE. Statistical comparisons of susceptibility profiles were performed using either the χ(2) test or the Fisher exact test. All data preprocessing and statistical analyses were performed using Python software. Results: Over the decade, we identified 291 CRE isolates (216 isolates resistant only to ertapenem and 75 resistant to ertapenem and meropenem). The ertapenem-resistant–only phenotype comprises ~66% of the total CRE population and is largely composed of E. cloacae (67%). As expected, most β-lactam susceptibilities were negligibly low between the 2 groups; however, other clinically relevant antimicrobials (aminoglycosides, fluoroquinolones, and sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim) exhibited starkly different susceptibility profiles (P value Conclusions: These findings suggest that the most predominant CRE phenotype at our institution is not carbapenemase production. Evaluation of outcomes between CP- and NCP-CRE should be pursued further. The large differences in the MIC distributions may lead to differing outcomes for the affected patients. Funding: No Disclosures: None Cambridge University Press 2021-07-29 /pmc/articles/PMC9551530/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ash.2021.136 Text en © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Mdr Gnr
Clark, Justin
Burgess, David
Difference in Susceptibility Between Carbapenemase- and Non–Carbapenemase-Producing Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae
title Difference in Susceptibility Between Carbapenemase- and Non–Carbapenemase-Producing Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae
title_full Difference in Susceptibility Between Carbapenemase- and Non–Carbapenemase-Producing Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae
title_fullStr Difference in Susceptibility Between Carbapenemase- and Non–Carbapenemase-Producing Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae
title_full_unstemmed Difference in Susceptibility Between Carbapenemase- and Non–Carbapenemase-Producing Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae
title_short Difference in Susceptibility Between Carbapenemase- and Non–Carbapenemase-Producing Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae
title_sort difference in susceptibility between carbapenemase- and non–carbapenemase-producing carbapenem-resistant enterobacteriaceae
topic Mdr Gnr
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9551530/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ash.2021.136
work_keys_str_mv AT clarkjustin differenceinsusceptibilitybetweencarbapenemaseandnoncarbapenemaseproducingcarbapenemresistantenterobacteriaceae
AT burgessdavid differenceinsusceptibilitybetweencarbapenemaseandnoncarbapenemaseproducingcarbapenemresistantenterobacteriaceae