Tigecycline is regarded as a last-resort treatment for carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae (CRKP) infections, but increasing numbers of tigecycline-resistant K. pneumoniae isolates have been reported. The tigecycline resistance mechanisms in CRKP are undetermined. This study aimed to elucidate the mechanisms underlying tigecycline resistance in 16 tigecycline-and carbapenem-resistant K. pneumoniae (TCRKP) isolates. Mutations in tigecycline resistance determinant genes [ramR, acrR, oqxR, tet(A), tet(L), tet(X), tet(M), rpsJ]were assessed by PCR amplicon sequencing, and mutations in ramR and tet(A) exhibited high prevalences individually (81%) and in combination (63%). Eight functional ramR mutation profiles reducing tigecycline sensitivity were verified by plasmid complementation of wild-type and mutant ramR. Using a site-specific mutant, the most frequent RamR mutation, A19V (60%), had no significant effect on tigecycline susceptibility or the upregulation of ramA and acrA. Two tet(A) variants with double frameshift mutations, type 1 and type 2, were identified; type 2 tet(A) is novel. A parent strain transformed with a plasmid carrying type 1 or type 2 tet(A) increased the tigecycline MIC by 8-fold or 4-fold, respectively. Synergistic effects were observed in strains harboring no ramR gene and a mutated tet(A), with an 8-fold increase in the tigecycline MIC compared with that in strains harboring only mutated tet(A) being seen. Overall, mutations in the ramR and tet(A) efflux genes constituted the major tigecycline resistance mechanisms among the studied TCRKP isolates. The identification of strains exhibiting the combination of a ramR deficiency and widespread mutated tet(A) is concerning due to the possible dissemination of increased tigecycline resistance in K. pneumoniae.

Resistance to carbapenems has been documented by the production of carbapenemase or the loss of porins combined with extended-spectrum β-lactamases or AmpC β-lactamases. However, no complete comparisons have been made regarding the contributions of each resistance mechanism towards carbapenem resistance. In this study, we genetically engineered mutants of Klebsiella pneumoniae with individual and combined resistance mechanisms, and then compared each resistance mechanism in response to ertapenem, imipenem, meropenem, doripenem and other antibiotics. Among the four studied carbapenems, ertapenem was the least active against the loss of porins, cephalosporinases and carbapenemases. In addition to the production of KPC-2 or NDM-1 alone, resistance to all four carbapenems could also be conferred by the loss of two major porins, OmpK35 and OmpK36, combined with CTX-M-15 or DHA-1 with its regulator AmpR. Because the loss of OmpK35/36 alone or the loss of a single porin combined with bla CTX-M-15 or bla DHA-1-ampR expression was only sufficient for ertapenem resistance, our results suggest that carbapenems other than ertapenem should still be effective against these strains and laboratory testing for non-susceptibility to other carbapenems should improve the accurate identification of these isolates.

Multilocus sequence typing (MLST) is one of the most commonly used methods for studying microbial lineage worldwide. However, the traditional MLST process using Sanger sequencing is time-consuming and expensive. We have designed a workflow that simultaneously sequenced seven full-length housekeeping genes of 96 meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolates with dual-barcode multiplexing using just a single flow cell of an Oxford Nanopore Technologies MinION system, and then we performed bioinformatic analysis for strain typing. Fifty-one of the isolates comprising 34 sequence types had been characterized using Sanger sequencing. We demonstrate that the allele assignments obtained by our nanopore workflow (nanoMLST, available at https://github.com/jade-nhri/nanoMLST) were identical to those obtained by Sanger sequencing (359/359, with 100 % agreement rate). In addition, we estimate that our multiplex system is able to perform MLST for up to 1000 samples simultaneously; thus, providing a rapid and cost-effective solution for molecular typing.

No abstract