1994
DOI: 10.1128/aac.38.2.392
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Identification of TEM-26 beta-lactamase responsible for a major outbreak of ceftazidime-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae

Abstract: An epidemic of nosocomial ceftazidime-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae was correlated with production of a ceftazidime-hydrolyzing enzyme with an isoelectric point of 5.6 (BMH-1). BMH-1 was encoded on a large transferable plasmid conferring multiple antibiotic resistance. The gene that encodes BMH-1 was identical to the gene that encodes the TEM-26 extended-spectrum beta-lactamase.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
39
1
1

Year Published

1996
1996
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 65 publications
(41 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
39
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, TEM-10 has been responsible for several unrelated outbreaks of ESBL-producing organisms in the United States for a number of years (26,112,143,175). However, TEM-10 has only recently been reported in Europe with the same frequency (8,84).…”
Section: Epidemiologymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, TEM-10 has been responsible for several unrelated outbreaks of ESBL-producing organisms in the United States for a number of years (26,112,143,175). However, TEM-10 has only recently been reported in Europe with the same frequency (8,84).…”
Section: Epidemiologymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the production of TEM-24 in K. pneumoniae only concerned 13.3% of the K. pneumoniae isolates producing ESBLs, while in a neighboring geographic region these bacteria remained at epidemic proportions (18). In France, TEM-3 is secreted largely by Klebsiella spp., P. mirabilis, and C. koseri, while in other countries, other ESBLs are in the majority (4,8,11,24,26,30,34). ESBLs in the CTX-M group (CTX-M-3, CTX-M-14, and CTX-M-15) were only observed in E. coli strains.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Of these isolates, 8 (7.6%) had been misidentified and 66 (62.9%) generated different codes on repeat testing that could be identified by ␤lasEN. It is possible that some of these differences in codes could have been due to the loss one or more resistance mechanisms during storage and transport between the initial and repeat test sites (1,26,43).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%