Overall bacteremia rate is currently <0.5% in well-appearing children aged 3-36 months with FWS attending the PED in areas with PCV-7 widespread vaccination and is sufficiently low to preclude laboratory testing in favour of close follow-up. Further research is needed to evaluate a more conservative approach in infants 2-3 months of age.
BackgroundMultidrug resistance and, in particular, carbapenem resistance is spreading worldwide at an alarming rate, comprehending a variety of bacterial species and causing both nosocomial and community acquired outbursts. Early and efficient detection of infected patients or colonized carriers are mandatory steps in infection control and prevention of multidrug resistance diffusion. The latest EUCAST guidelines for detection of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae have set low clinical breakpoints to ensure the maximum detection sensitivity of positive samples. Current workflows involve an initial screening step for species and resistance pattern detection, followed by phenotypic and/or genotypic confirmation. The aim of the present study was to assess the efficiency of six widely used and validated phenotypic assays for the detection of carbapenemases/AmpC in Enterobacteriaceae, to estimate the best workflow in the routine characterization of Enterobacteriaceae isolates.MethodsA panel of 108 non-repetitive Enterobacteriaceae isolates with reduced susceptibility to carbapenems was analyzed by means of 1) Modified Hodge Test, 2) Metallo Beta Lactamase Etest, 3) Double disk test with EDTA, 4) Rosco Diagnostica KPC and MBL confirm kit (RDCK™), 5) AmpC Etest and 6) Cloxacillin inhibition test. Confirmation and validation of results was achieved by genotypic analysis.ResultsThe most accurate identification of resistance determinants was obtained with the combined disc test (Rosco Diagnostica KPC and MBL confirm kit) which had to be coupled with the cloxacillin inhibition test for correct detection of AmpC enzymes. However, in general, phenotypic tests failed to characterize isolates harboring multiple carbapenem resistance determinants, which were successfully assessed only by PCR-based analysis.ConclusionsTo detect and control the spread of pathogens with complicated resistance patterns, both optimized phenotypic analysis (i.e. Rosco Diagnostica KPC and MBL confirm kit coupled with the cloxacillin inhibition test) and genotypic assays are recommended in the routine diagnostic of clinical laboratories.
BackgroundKlebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemases (KPCs) producing bacteria have emerged as a cause of multidrug-resistant nosocomial infections worldwide. KPCs are plasmid-encoded enzymes capable of hydrolysing a broad spectrum of beta-lactams, including carbapenems and monobactams, therefore worryingly limiting antimicrobial treatment options. Analysis of circulating bacterial strains and KPC alleles may help understanding the route of KPC dissemination and therefore help containing the infection.MethodsKPC-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae dissemination in two 1580- and 300- bed hospitals in Padua, Italy, from initial outbreak in 2009 to late 2011 was analysed. Molecular and clinical epidemiology, including bacterial strains, KPC-encoding plasmid sequences and associated resistance genes, involved hospital wards and relocation of patients were described. Routine antimicrobial susceptibility testing and MIC of carbapenems on clinical isolates were performed. Detection of resistance genes was obtained by PCR and sequencing. MLST, PFGE and ERIC were used for molecular genotyping. Plasmid analysis was obtained by digestion with restriction enzymes and deep sequencing.ResultsKPC-positive clinical samples were isolated from nearly 200 patients. In the initial outbreak intensive care units were almost exclusively involved, while medical, surgical and long-term wards were successively massively concerned. Analysis of KPC alleles, plasmids and bacterial sequence types (STs) indicated that during the initial outbreak KPC-3 in ST258 and KPC-2 in ST147 were each confined in one of the two surveilled hospitals. While KPC-2 dissemination was effectively contained, KPC-3 in ST258 cross-spreading was observed. The simultaneous presence of two carbapenemases, VIM-1 and KPC-2, in the same isolate was also observed in three patients. Total sequencing of plasmid content of two KPC-3 strains showed novel association of resistance plasmids.ConclusionsThe acquired molecular epidemiology demonstrated that 1) both acquisitions from outward sources and patient relocation within the hospitals were responsible for the observed spreading; 2) KPC-3-encoding Klebsiella pneumoniae ST258 prevailed over other strains. In addition, the described massive transfer of KPC-mediated resistance to non-intensive care units may anticipate spreading of resistance to the non-hospitalized population. Therefore, genotypic analysis alongside phenotypic identification of carbapenemase producers, also at the carriage state, is advisable to prevent and contain further carbapenemase resistance dissemination.
An extremely drug-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae isolate, sequence type ST101, was isolated from a patient in Italy. We describe antibiotic treatment, measures to clear and contain the infection, and a complete sequence analysis of a novel large plasmid, pKPN101-IT, harboring the bla KPC-2 gene and arising from the threatening recombination of different worldwide-distributed backbones.
The first case in Europe of Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC) 2 transfer from K. pneumoniae to Escherichia coli in the same patient is described. KPC-positive plasmids from the two species were identical, indicating horizontal plasmid transfer. Selection of the KPC-producing E. coli strain was triggered by therapy with meropenem
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.