Cargando…

Differences in Drug-Susceptibility Patterns between Mycobacterium avium, Mycobacterium intracellulare, and Mycobacterium chimaera Clinical Isolates: Prospective 8.5-Year Analysis by Three Laboratories

Background: It has been suggested that Mycobacterium avium, Mycobacterium intracellulare, and M. chimaera have differential drug susceptibility patterns. We prospectively analyzed and compared the drug susceptibility patterns among these species over an 8.5-year period. Methods: A microdilution meth...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fernandez-Pittol, Mariana, Batista-Arnau, Sara, Román, Angely, San Nicolás, Lorena, Oliver, Laura, González-Moreno, Olga, Martínez, José Antonio, Amaro-Rodríguez, Rosanel, Soler, Néstor, Gené, Amadeu, González-Cuevas, Araceli, Tudó, Griselda, Gonzalez-Martin, Julian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9854862/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36671265
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics12010064
_version_ 1784873233287217152
author Fernandez-Pittol, Mariana
Batista-Arnau, Sara
Román, Angely
San Nicolás, Lorena
Oliver, Laura
González-Moreno, Olga
Martínez, José Antonio
Amaro-Rodríguez, Rosanel
Soler, Néstor
Gené, Amadeu
González-Cuevas, Araceli
Tudó, Griselda
Gonzalez-Martin, Julian
author_facet Fernandez-Pittol, Mariana
Batista-Arnau, Sara
Román, Angely
San Nicolás, Lorena
Oliver, Laura
González-Moreno, Olga
Martínez, José Antonio
Amaro-Rodríguez, Rosanel
Soler, Néstor
Gené, Amadeu
González-Cuevas, Araceli
Tudó, Griselda
Gonzalez-Martin, Julian
author_sort Fernandez-Pittol, Mariana
collection PubMed
description Background: It has been suggested that Mycobacterium avium, Mycobacterium intracellulare, and M. chimaera have differential drug susceptibility patterns. We prospectively analyzed and compared the drug susceptibility patterns among these species over an 8.5-year period. Methods: A microdilution method (Slomyco(®)) was performed for drug susceptibility testing of 402 M. avium, 273 M. intracellulare, and 139 M. chimaera clinical isolates. Results: M. avium showed significantly higher resistance to moxifloxacin, ciprofloxacin, rifampicin, ethambutol, streptomycin, linezolid, cotrimoxazole, and clarithromycin. M. avium also showed higher minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC) than M. intracellulare and M. chimaera against all drugs except ethionamide, to which M. intracellulare and M. chimaera showed greater resistance. Conclusions: Our series demonstrated differential drug resistance patterns among the most frequent M. avium complex species. M. avium was more resistant than M. intracellulare and M. chimaera versus eight antibiotics and showed greater MIC values to most of the antibiotics studied. These data suggest that knowledge of the local distribution and susceptibility profiles of these pathogens is essential for adequate clinical management.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9854862
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98548622023-01-21 Differences in Drug-Susceptibility Patterns between Mycobacterium avium, Mycobacterium intracellulare, and Mycobacterium chimaera Clinical Isolates: Prospective 8.5-Year Analysis by Three Laboratories Fernandez-Pittol, Mariana Batista-Arnau, Sara Román, Angely San Nicolás, Lorena Oliver, Laura González-Moreno, Olga Martínez, José Antonio Amaro-Rodríguez, Rosanel Soler, Néstor Gené, Amadeu González-Cuevas, Araceli Tudó, Griselda Gonzalez-Martin, Julian Antibiotics (Basel) Article Background: It has been suggested that Mycobacterium avium, Mycobacterium intracellulare, and M. chimaera have differential drug susceptibility patterns. We prospectively analyzed and compared the drug susceptibility patterns among these species over an 8.5-year period. Methods: A microdilution method (Slomyco(®)) was performed for drug susceptibility testing of 402 M. avium, 273 M. intracellulare, and 139 M. chimaera clinical isolates. Results: M. avium showed significantly higher resistance to moxifloxacin, ciprofloxacin, rifampicin, ethambutol, streptomycin, linezolid, cotrimoxazole, and clarithromycin. M. avium also showed higher minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC) than M. intracellulare and M. chimaera against all drugs except ethionamide, to which M. intracellulare and M. chimaera showed greater resistance. Conclusions: Our series demonstrated differential drug resistance patterns among the most frequent M. avium complex species. M. avium was more resistant than M. intracellulare and M. chimaera versus eight antibiotics and showed greater MIC values to most of the antibiotics studied. These data suggest that knowledge of the local distribution and susceptibility profiles of these pathogens is essential for adequate clinical management. MDPI 2022-12-29 /pmc/articles/PMC9854862/ /pubmed/36671265 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics12010064 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Fernandez-Pittol, Mariana
Batista-Arnau, Sara
Román, Angely
San Nicolás, Lorena
Oliver, Laura
González-Moreno, Olga
Martínez, José Antonio
Amaro-Rodríguez, Rosanel
Soler, Néstor
Gené, Amadeu
González-Cuevas, Araceli
Tudó, Griselda
Gonzalez-Martin, Julian
Differences in Drug-Susceptibility Patterns between Mycobacterium avium, Mycobacterium intracellulare, and Mycobacterium chimaera Clinical Isolates: Prospective 8.5-Year Analysis by Three Laboratories
title Differences in Drug-Susceptibility Patterns between Mycobacterium avium, Mycobacterium intracellulare, and Mycobacterium chimaera Clinical Isolates: Prospective 8.5-Year Analysis by Three Laboratories
title_full Differences in Drug-Susceptibility Patterns between Mycobacterium avium, Mycobacterium intracellulare, and Mycobacterium chimaera Clinical Isolates: Prospective 8.5-Year Analysis by Three Laboratories
title_fullStr Differences in Drug-Susceptibility Patterns between Mycobacterium avium, Mycobacterium intracellulare, and Mycobacterium chimaera Clinical Isolates: Prospective 8.5-Year Analysis by Three Laboratories
title_full_unstemmed Differences in Drug-Susceptibility Patterns between Mycobacterium avium, Mycobacterium intracellulare, and Mycobacterium chimaera Clinical Isolates: Prospective 8.5-Year Analysis by Three Laboratories
title_short Differences in Drug-Susceptibility Patterns between Mycobacterium avium, Mycobacterium intracellulare, and Mycobacterium chimaera Clinical Isolates: Prospective 8.5-Year Analysis by Three Laboratories
title_sort differences in drug-susceptibility patterns between mycobacterium avium, mycobacterium intracellulare, and mycobacterium chimaera clinical isolates: prospective 8.5-year analysis by three laboratories
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9854862/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36671265
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics12010064
work_keys_str_mv AT fernandezpittolmariana differencesindrugsusceptibilitypatternsbetweenmycobacteriumaviummycobacteriumintracellulareandmycobacteriumchimaeraclinicalisolatesprospective85yearanalysisbythreelaboratories
AT batistaarnausara differencesindrugsusceptibilitypatternsbetweenmycobacteriumaviummycobacteriumintracellulareandmycobacteriumchimaeraclinicalisolatesprospective85yearanalysisbythreelaboratories
AT romanangely differencesindrugsusceptibilitypatternsbetweenmycobacteriumaviummycobacteriumintracellulareandmycobacteriumchimaeraclinicalisolatesprospective85yearanalysisbythreelaboratories
AT sannicolaslorena differencesindrugsusceptibilitypatternsbetweenmycobacteriumaviummycobacteriumintracellulareandmycobacteriumchimaeraclinicalisolatesprospective85yearanalysisbythreelaboratories
AT oliverlaura differencesindrugsusceptibilitypatternsbetweenmycobacteriumaviummycobacteriumintracellulareandmycobacteriumchimaeraclinicalisolatesprospective85yearanalysisbythreelaboratories
AT gonzalezmorenoolga differencesindrugsusceptibilitypatternsbetweenmycobacteriumaviummycobacteriumintracellulareandmycobacteriumchimaeraclinicalisolatesprospective85yearanalysisbythreelaboratories
AT martinezjoseantonio differencesindrugsusceptibilitypatternsbetweenmycobacteriumaviummycobacteriumintracellulareandmycobacteriumchimaeraclinicalisolatesprospective85yearanalysisbythreelaboratories
AT amarorodriguezrosanel differencesindrugsusceptibilitypatternsbetweenmycobacteriumaviummycobacteriumintracellulareandmycobacteriumchimaeraclinicalisolatesprospective85yearanalysisbythreelaboratories
AT solernestor differencesindrugsusceptibilitypatternsbetweenmycobacteriumaviummycobacteriumintracellulareandmycobacteriumchimaeraclinicalisolatesprospective85yearanalysisbythreelaboratories
AT geneamadeu differencesindrugsusceptibilitypatternsbetweenmycobacteriumaviummycobacteriumintracellulareandmycobacteriumchimaeraclinicalisolatesprospective85yearanalysisbythreelaboratories
AT gonzalezcuevasaraceli differencesindrugsusceptibilitypatternsbetweenmycobacteriumaviummycobacteriumintracellulareandmycobacteriumchimaeraclinicalisolatesprospective85yearanalysisbythreelaboratories
AT tudogriselda differencesindrugsusceptibilitypatternsbetweenmycobacteriumaviummycobacteriumintracellulareandmycobacteriumchimaeraclinicalisolatesprospective85yearanalysisbythreelaboratories
AT gonzalezmartinjulian differencesindrugsusceptibilitypatternsbetweenmycobacteriumaviummycobacteriumintracellulareandmycobacteriumchimaeraclinicalisolatesprospective85yearanalysisbythreelaboratories