Communication Special Issues

Clonal dissemination and resistance genes among Stenotrophomonas maltophilia in a Greek University Hospital during a four-year period

  • Treatment of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia infections comprises of sulfamethoxazole/tripethoprim (SXT) or fluoroquinolones. We investigated antimicrobial resistance, presence of resistance genes (sul1, smqnr) and clonal dissemination in S. maltophilia from a university hospital. Among 62 isolates, 45 (73%) represented infection. Two isolates (3%) were resistant to SXT and three (5%) to levofloxacin. Twenty-nine isolates (47%), including two out of three levofloxacin-resistant, carried smqnr. Resistance of S. maltophilia was low and was not associated with sul1 or smqnr carriage. Although high degree of genetic diversity was identified (29 pulsotypes), 22/62 (35.5%) strains were classified into four clones; clone b was associated with bacteraemias.

    Citation: Matthaios Papadimitriou-Olivgeris, Fevronia Kolonitsiou, Maria Militsopoulou, Iris Spiliopoulou, Nikolaos Giormezis. Clonal dissemination and resistance genes among Stenotrophomonas maltophilia in a Greek University Hospital during a four-year period[J]. AIMS Microbiology, 2022, 8(3): 292-299. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2022021

    Related Papers:

    [1] Amira ElBaradei, Dalia Ali Maharem, Ola Kader, Mustafa Kareem Ghareeb, Iman S. Naga . Fecal carriage of ESBL-producing Escherichia coli in Egyptian patients admitted to the Medical Research Institute hospital, Alexandria University. AIMS Microbiology, 2020, 6(4): 422-433. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2020025
    [2] Ogueri Nwaiwu, Chiugo Claret Aduba . An in silico analysis of acquired antimicrobial resistance genes in Aeromonas plasmids. AIMS Microbiology, 2020, 6(1): 75-91. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2020005
    [3] Rania Abozahra, Amal Gaballah, Sarah M. Abdelhamid . Prevalence of the colistin resistance gene MCR-1 in colistin-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae in Egypt. AIMS Microbiology, 2023, 9(2): 177-194. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2023011
    [4] Oluwafolajimi Adesanya, Tolulope Oduselu, Oluwawapelumi Akin-Ajani, Olubusuyi M. Adewumi, Olusegun G. Ademowo . An exegesis of bacteriophage therapy: An emerging player in the fight against anti-microbial resistance. AIMS Microbiology, 2020, 6(3): 204-230. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2020014
    [5] Rochelle Keet, Diane Rip . Listeria monocytogenes isolates from Western Cape, South Africa exhibit resistance to multiple antibiotics and contradicts certain global resistance patterns. AIMS Microbiology, 2021, 7(1): 40-58. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2021004
    [6] Tomokazu Shoji, Ryusei Muto, Ryoko Sakai, Hiroki Matsumura, Takashi Uchida, Fumihiko Kitta, Osamu Inoue, Keishi Kawata, Manabu Akazawa . Estimated medical costs of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection classified by polymerase chain reaction-based open reading frame typing in Japan. AIMS Microbiology, 2022, 8(4): 528-543. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2022034
    [7] Babak Elyasi Far, Mehran Ragheb, Reza Rahbar, Ladan Mafakher, Neda Yousefi Nojookambari, Spyridon Achinas, Sajjad Yazdansetad . Cloning and expression of Staphylococcus simulans lysostaphin enzyme gene in Bacillus subtilis WB600. AIMS Microbiology, 2021, 7(3): 271-283. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2021017
    [8] Kholoud Baraka, Rania Abozahra, Marwa Mohammed Haggag, Sarah M Abdelhamid . Genotyping and molecular investigation of plasmid-mediated carbapenem resistant clinical Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates in Egypt. AIMS Microbiology, 2023, 9(2): 228-244. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2023014
    [9] Ariel J. Santiago, Maria L. Burgos-Garay, Leila Kartforosh, Mustafa Mazher, Rodney M. Donlan . Bacteriophage treatment of carbapenemase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae in a multispecies biofilm: a potential biocontrol strategy for healthcare facilities. AIMS Microbiology, 2020, 6(1): 43-63. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2020003
    [10] Alexey V. Rakov, Natalya A. Kuznetsova, Anatoly A. Yakovlev . Genetic diversity of Salmonella enterica subsp. enterica serovar Enteritidis in the Siberia and Far East of Russia based on plasmid profiles. AIMS Microbiology, 2020, 6(2): 106-120. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2020007
  • Treatment of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia infections comprises of sulfamethoxazole/tripethoprim (SXT) or fluoroquinolones. We investigated antimicrobial resistance, presence of resistance genes (sul1, smqnr) and clonal dissemination in S. maltophilia from a university hospital. Among 62 isolates, 45 (73%) represented infection. Two isolates (3%) were resistant to SXT and three (5%) to levofloxacin. Twenty-nine isolates (47%), including two out of three levofloxacin-resistant, carried smqnr. Resistance of S. maltophilia was low and was not associated with sul1 or smqnr carriage. Although high degree of genetic diversity was identified (29 pulsotypes), 22/62 (35.5%) strains were classified into four clones; clone b was associated with bacteraemias.



    Stenotrophomonas maltophilia is an emerging pathogen which can be found in the environment but is also able to cause infections in immunocompromised patients, critically ill patients and those suffering from cystic fibrosis. Despite its susceptibility to antimicrobials, it has emerged in the last decades as an important nosocomial pathogen with mortality rates between 14 and 69% in bacteraemic patients [1]. Risk factors for infection include prolonged hospitalization, especially in Intensive Care Units, previous antibiotic treatment, chronic respiratory disease, prolonged endotracheal intubation and the presence of a central venous catheter [1],[2].

    Sulphamethoxazole/trimethoprim (SXT) remains the treatment of choice for Stenotrophomonas infections, whereas, fluoroquinolones are the second-line drug. Treatment can be complicate by the transfer and acquisition of antimicrobial resistance, since mobile genetic elements, such as transposons and plasmids, carry resistance genes [3]. Carriage of sul1 and sul2 genes as part on integron I has been associated with resistance to SXT [4]. Another gene family, known as smqnr encodes proteins associated with resistance to fluoroquinolones [5].

    The aim of this study was to investigate possible clonal dissemination, antimicrobial resistance patterns and the presence of resistance genes among S. maltophilia in a Greek University Hospital.

    The retrospective study was conducted in the University General Hospital of Patras (UGHP), Greece during a four-year period (2014–2017). UGHP is a 800-bed tertiary hospital in Southwestern Greece. The Hospital Ethics Committee approved the study and waived the need for informed consent (HEC No: 785).

    All S. maltophilia strains isolated from various clinical specimens (blood, bronchial aspirations, intravenous catheters and wounds) were identified to species level by the Vitek 2 Advanced Expert System (bioMerieux, Marcy l'Etoile, France). Infection or colonization was distinguished according to clinical diagnoses. Colonization was defined as the presence of S. maltophilia on the respiratory system without causing adverse clinical signs or symptoms and no specific antimicrobial treatment was initiated by the treating physician. Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of SXT was determined by E-test (bioMerieux) and susceptibility against levofloxacin was tested by the disk diffusion method according to CLSI guidelines [6]. Amplification of the resistance genes sul1, sul2 and smqnr was performed by PCRs with specific primers, as published [7].

    Strains were classified into pulsotypes by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) of chromosomal DNA XbaI digests (Promega Corporation) performed in a CHEF DR III apparatus (Bio-Rad, Richmond, CA). PFGE was performed under the following conditions: initial switch time 5 s, final switch time 5 s, voltage 6V/cm, included angle 120°, run time 23 hours. A dendrogram comparing molecular weights of strains' DNA fragments was performed by FPQuest software version 4.5 (Bio-Rad Laboratories Inc). Patterns differing by less than 79% (corresponding to a difference of less than seven bands) were considered to belong to the same PFGE type [8].

    Risk factors for S. maltophilia infection as compared to colonization were studied in patients that medical records were available. Epidemiological data, comorbidities, antimicrobial administration, and mortality prediction were obtained from patients' chart reviews.

    SPSS version 23.0 (SPSS, Chicago, IL) software was used for data analysis. Categorical variables were analyzed by using the chi-square or Fisher exact test. All statistic tests were 2-tailed and P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

    In total, sixty-two isolates were included (one per-patient) deriving from bloodstream infections (BSIs, n = 26; 42%), surgical site infections (SSIs, n = 13; 21%), catheter-related infections (CRIs, n = 6; 10%) or colonization of the respiratory tract (17; 27%). The majority was recovered from patients hospitalized in medical wards (n = 23; 37%), followed by adult ICU (19; 31%), surgical wards (11; 18%), emergency department (5; 8%) and paediatric ICU (4; 6%).

    Two strains (3.2%) were resistant to SXT (MIC: 32 mg/L) and three (4.8%) to levofloxacin. Five strains carried sul1 including both SXT-resistant and three SXT-susceptible ones, whereas all isolates were negative for sul2. Twenty-nine strains (46.8%), including two out of three levofloxacin-resistant, carried smqnr. Four S. maltophilia strains carried both sul1 and smqnr (Table 1). No significant difference among infective and colonizing isolates was identified regarding antimicrobial resistance or genes' carriage.

    Table 1.  Clonal distribution in relation to infection type/colonization and resistant determinants of studied isolates.
    Clones Infection type/ Colonization SXT-Resistant Levofloxacin-Resistant sul1 smqnr
    a (6) BSI (2) - - - 2
    SSI (2) - - - 2
    Colonization (2) 1 - 1 1

    b (6) BSI (6) - - - -

    c (5) BSI (1) - - - -
    SSI (1) - - - -
    Colonization (3) - - - 3

    d (6) BSI (1) - - - -
    SSI (1) - - - 1
    CRI (2) - - - -
    Colonization (2) - - - 2

    Others (39) BSI (16) - - 1 6
    SSI (9) 1 2 2 5
    CRI (4) - - - 2
    Colonization (10) - 1 1 5

    Total (62) 2 3 5 29

    *Note: Infection or colonization was distinguished according to clinical diagnoses. Colonization was defined as the presence of S. maltophilia on the respiratory system without causing adverse clinical signs or symptoms. Number of isolates are presented in parentheses. BSI: Bloodstream infection, SSI: Surgical site infection, CRI: Catheter-related infection.

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Twenty-nine pulsotypes were identified by PFGE, with 23 out of 62 (37.1%) strains classified into four main clones, consisting of five or six strains each (Figure 1). The remaining 39 strains were classified into 25 PFGE types, including one or two strains each. No clonal relationship was identified regarding antimicrobial resistance patterns, genes' carriage, or hospital wards. However, a statistically significant association was found for strains of pulsotype b that were exclusively recovered from bacteraemic patients (P = 0.004).

    Medical records were available for 45 patients (27 infected and 18 colonized). No statistical difference was observed among comorbidities, immunosuppression or presence of resistant genes. Patients with S. maltophilia infection were more frequent exposed to ceftazidime/avibactam (48% vs 6%; P 0.003). No difference in 30-day mortality was observed among patients with infection vs colonization (Table 2).

    Figure 1.  Dendrogram of representative S. maltophilia strains.

    Resistance to the two main antibiotics used for the treatment of S. maltophilia infections, SXT and levofloxacin, was low (3.2% and 4.8%, respectively) [9]. In our study presence of the studied resistance genes (sul1, smqnr) did not confer phenotypic resistance to SXT or levofloxacin, since some phenotypically susceptible strains carried those genes. This finding is in accordance to the literature, since sul1 and/or smqnr were commonly detected in both resistant and susceptible isolates [7],[10][12]. Treatment of infected patients with S. maltophilia was successful, even for strains carrying resistance genes. Infective and colonizing isolates were both highly susceptible to SXT and levofloxacin, in accordance to a study by Juhász et al, where a low resistance rate was also identified in both groups [13]. Carriage of sul1 was low (8.06%) and all our strains tested negative for sul2, whereas in other studies worldwide both genes have been detected in clinical isolates [14]. sul2 has even been reported as commoner than sul1 in one study from 106 strains in India [15].

    Table 2.  Univariate analysis of risk factors for infection by S. maltophilia as compared to colonization.
    Characteristics S. maltophilia colonization (n = 18) S. maltophilia infection (n = 27) P
    Days at riska 36.8 ± 33.9 31.8 ± 21.0 0.613

    Demographics
    Age (years) 62.6 ± 13.0 58.2 ± 13.2 0.338
    Male gender 10 (63%) 10 (59%) 1.000

    Chronic diseases
    Diabetes Mellitus 3 (19%) 1 (6%) 0.335
    Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 0 (0%) 0 (0%) -
    Chronic Heart Failure 1 (6%) 1 (6%) 1.000
    Chronic Renal Failure 0 (0%) 3 (18%) 0.227
    Malignancy 1 (6%) 2 (12%) 1.000
    Immunosuppression 1 (6%) 2 (12%) 1.000

    Obesity (BMI ≥ 30kg/m2) 3 (19%) 5 (29%) 0.688
    Charlson Comorbidity Index 3.8 ± 1.6 3.3 ± 2.5 0.492

    Admission data
    APACHE II Score upon admission 20.0 ± 4.4 18.0 ± 4.6 0.271
    Prior surgery (prior month) 7 (44%) 9 (53%) 0.732

    Antibiotic administration (prior month)
    Penicillin/beta- lactamase inhibitors 9 (56%) 4 (24%) 0.080
    3rd- and 4th-generation cephalosporins 2 (13%) 4 (24%) 0.656
    Ceftazidime/avibactam 1 (6%) 13 (48%) 0.003
    Carbapenems 13 (81%) 16 (94%) 0.335
    Quinolones 2 (13%) 4 (24%) 0.656
    Colistin 8 (50%) 14 (82%) 0.071
    Aminoglycosides 5 (31%) 9 (53%) 0.296
    Tigecycline 4 (25%) 7 (41%) 0.465
    Glucopeptides 14 (88%) 10 (59%) 0.118
    Linezolid 5 (31%) 7 (41%) 0.721

    ICU procedures
    Corticosteroid administration 10 (63%) 13 (77%) 0.465
    Parenteral nutrition 8 (50%) 6 (35%) 0.491
    Enteral nutrition 9 (56%) 11 (65%) 0.728

    Microbiologic data
    Presence of smqnr gene (among 21 patients) 5 (56%) 7 (58%) 1.000
    Presence of sul1gene (among 21 patients) 2 (22%) 3 (25%) 1.000

    Outcome
    30-day mortality 7 (44%) 4 (24%) 0.282

    *Note: Data are number (%) of patients or mean ± standard deviation. APACHE II: Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II. a Length of stay until infection or colonization.

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    S. maltophilia strains isolated from UGHP patients showed major genetic diversity (29 pulsotypes), as previously reported [9]. This genetic diversity could be attributed to the colonization of patients before or after their admission to the hospital. No correlation between specific clones and resistance to aforementioned antibiotics or carriage of resistance genes was found. The isolation of genetically similar strains, belonging to four main clones, from different patients hospitalized in various wards raised the possibility of transmission within the hospital, but no specific link could be established among personnel or patients' transfer. One of the major clones, pulsotype b, consisted of six strains isolated exclusively from blood infections (P = 0.004). Another pulsotype comprised of three isolates derived also from BSIs, but no other statistically significant correlation between clones and infection type was identified. In a previous study of bacteraemias at the UGHP, S. maltophilia represented 0.8% of all bloodstream infections, percentage comparable to that from a point prevalence survey of healthcare-associated infections and antimicrobial use in European acute care hospitals (1%) [16],[17]. In another study by Valdezade et al., 139 S. maltophilia isolates recovered from hospitalized non-cystic fibrosis patients were classified in 99 distinct PFGE profiles, but despite this genetic diversity a few clones were transmitted among different patients causing outbreaks [18].

    At the exception of ceftazidime/avibactam, no difference was observed among patients with infection and colonization. The low number of patients might explain the absence of association of typical risk factors, such as immunosuppression, prior carbapenem treatment, and S. malotphilia infection [19]. The fact that prior ceftazidime/avibactam use was associated with S. maltophilia infection was striking, since ceftazidime/avibactam retains some activity against S. maltophilia strains [20].

    Our study has limitations since it was performed in a single center, the number of S. maltophilia strains was relatively low and PCR was performed only for the main, and not all, genetic determinants conferring resistance to SXT and levofloxacin. Another limitation was the low number of patients for which clinical data were available.

    S. maltophilia isolates presented low rates of resistance to SXT or levofloxacin that was not associated with the presence of sul1, sul2 or smqnr genes. Even though a high degree of genetic diversity was found, a statistically important correlation of a specific clone with blood infections was detected.



    Conflict of interest



    All authors declare no conflicts of interest in this paper.

    [1] Brooke JS (2012) Stenotrophomonas maltophilia: an emerging global opportunistic pathogen. Clin Microbiol Rev 25: 2-41. https://doi.org/10.1128/CMR.00019-11
    [2] Lai CH, Chi CY, Chen HP, et al. (2004) Clinical characteristics and prognostic factors of patients with Stenotrophomonas maltophilia bacteremia. J Microbiol Immunol Infect 37: 350-358. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15599467/
    [3] Chang LL, Chen HF, Chang CY, et al. (2004) Contribution of integrons, and SmeABC and SmeDEF efflux pumps to multidrug resistance in clinical isolates of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia. J Antimicrob Chemother 53: 518-521. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkh094
    [4] Hu LF, Chang X, Ye Y, et al. (2011) Stenotrophomonas maltophilia resistance to trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole mediated by acquisition of sul and dfrA genes in a plasmid-mediated class 1 integron. Int J Antimicrob Agents 37: 230-234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2010.10.025
    [5] Malekan M, Tabaraie B, Akhoundtabar L, et al. (2017) Distribution of class I integron and smqnr resistance gene among stenotrophomonas maltophilia isolated from clinical samples in Iran. Avicenna J Med Biotechnol 9: 138-141. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28706609/
    [6] (2020) Clinical and Laboratory Standards InstitutePerformance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing. CLSI supplement M100. PA: Wayne. Available from: https://www.clsi.org/standards/products/microbiology/documents/m100/
    [7] Bostanghadiri N, Ghalavand Z, Fallah F, et al. (2019) Characterization of phenotypic and genotypic diversity of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia strains isolated from selected hospitals in Iran. Front Microbiol 10: 1191. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2019.01191
    [8] Tenover FC, Arbeit RD, Goering RV, et al. (1995) Interpreting chromosomal DNA restriction patterns produced by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis: criteria for bacterial strain typing. J Clin Microbiol 33: 2233-2239. https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.33.9.2233-2239.1995
    [9] Neela V, Rankouhi SZ, van Belkum A, et al. (2012) Stenotrophomonas maltophilia in Malaysia: molecular epidemiology and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole resistance. Int J Infect Dis 16: e603-e607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2012.04.004
    [10] Song JH, Sung JY, Kwon KC, et al. (2010) Analysis of acquired resistance genes in Stenotrophomonas maltophilia. Korean J Lab Med 30: 295-300. https://doi.org/10.3343/kjlm.2010.30.3.295
    [11] Hu LF, Chen GS, Kong QX, et al. (2016) Increase in the prevalence of resistance determinants to trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole in clinical Stenotrophomonas maltophilia isolates in China. PloS One 11: e0157693. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0157693
    [12] Kanamori H, Yano H, Tanouchi A, et al. (2015) Prevalence of smqnr and plasmid-mediated quinolone resistance determinants in clinical isolates of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia from Japan: novel variants of Smqnr. New Microbes New Infect 7: 8-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nmni.2015.04.009
    [13] Juhász E, Krizsán G, Lengyel G, et al. (2014) Infection and colonization by Stenotrophomonas maltophilia: antimicrobial susceptibility and clinical background of strains isolated at a tertiary care centre in Hungary. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob 13: 333. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12941-014-0058-9
    [14] Ebrahim-Saraie HS, Heidari H, Soltani B, et al. (2019) Prevalence of antibiotic resistance and integrons, sul and Smqnr genes in clinical isolates of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia from a tertiary care hospital in Southwest Iran. Iran J Basic Med Sc 22: 872-877. https://doi.org/10.22038/ijbms.2019.31291.7540
    [15] Kaur P, Gautam V, Tewari R (2015) Distribution of class 1 integrons, sul1 and sul2 genes among clinical isolates of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia from a tertiary care hospital in North India. Microbial drug resistance (Larchmont,N.Y.) 21: 380-385. https://doi.org/10.1089/mdr.2014.0176
    [16] Kolonitsiou F, Papadimitriou-Olivgeris M, Spiliopoulou A, et al. (2017) Trends of bloodstream infections in a university greek hospital during a three-year period: Incidence of multidrug-resistant bacteria and seasonality in gram-negativep Predominance. Pol J Microbiol 66: 171-180. https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0010.7834
    [17] European Centre for Disease Prevention and ControlPoint prevalence survey of healthcare-associated infections and antimicrobial use in European acute care hospitals (2013). https://doi.org/10.2807/ese.17.46.20316-en
    [18] Valdezate S, Vindel A, Martín-Dávila P, et al. (2004) High genetic diversity among Stenotrophomonas maltophilia strains despite their originating at a single hospital. J Clin Microbiol 42: 693-699. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.42.2.693-699.2003
    [19] Wang N, Tang C, Wang L (2022) Risk factors for acquired Stenotrophomonas maltophilia pneumonia in intensive care unit: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Med 8: 808391. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2021.808391
    [20] Lin Q, Zou H, Chen X, et al. (2021) Avibactam potentiated the activity of both ceftazidime and aztreonam against S. maltophilia clinical isolates in vitro. BMC Microbiol 21: 60. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12866-021-02108-2
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Soheila Bafandeh Zamanpour, Rasoul Yousefi Mashouf, Himen Salimizand, Mohsen Nazari, Mohammad Yousef Alikhani, Safar Farajnia, Relationship between antibiotic resistance with class 1 integron and SmeDEF efflux pump encoding genes in clinical isolates of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, 2023, 64, 1234-1983, 591, 10.1007/s13353-023-00776-6
    2. Narjess Bostanghadiri, Mohammad Sholeh, Tahereh Navidifar, Leila Dadgar-Zankbar, Zahra Elahi, Alex van Belkum, Davood Darban-Sarokhalil, Global mapping of antibiotic resistance rates among clinical isolates of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia: a systematic review and meta-analysis, 2024, 23, 1476-0711, 10.1186/s12941-024-00685-4
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2022 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(2258) PDF downloads(183) Cited by(2)

Figures and Tables

Figures(1)  /  Tables(2)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog