Phenotypic and Genotypic Characterisation of Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacterales Isolated from Intensive Care Unit Specimens: A Cross-Sectional Study at a Tertiary Care Hospital

Authors

  • Dr. Arockiaamalareena A Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.48047/jadf7k91

Keywords:

Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales, arbapenemase, antimicrobial resistance, ceftazidime-avibactam

Abstract

Background: Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) have become important priority pathogens in the intensive care units (ICUs) worldwide. The ICMR Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance Network (AMRSN) 2022 provided data on meropenem resistance in clinical Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates in India, which is around 56%, and there is an urgent need for epidemiological data based on the institution. Knowing the local prevalence of CRE, distribution of the carbapenemase genes, the antibiogram profile and risk factors for CRE acquisition is of key importance for developing effective antimicrobial stewardship and infection control measures.

      Design: This observational cross sectional study was carried out for 18 months in the ICU of tertiary care hospital. All Enterobacterales isolates from clinical samples (blood, urine, respiratory sample, pus, body fluid) of patients on the inpatient wards in the ICU were considered (target n = 420). VITEK-2 automated system and disc diffusion CLSI M100-2024 breakpoints were used to detect carbapenem resistance; and the modified carbapenem inactivation method (mCIM) and EDTA-mCIM were used to confirm the resistance phenotype. Carbapenemase-encoding genes (blaNDM, blaOXA-48-like, blaKPC, blaVIM, blaIMP) were characterised by multiplex real-time PCR. Independent predictors of CRE acquisition were identified using multivariable logistic regression.

      Results: CRE prevalence was 33.1% (n = 139/420). The most common organisms were Klebsiella pneumoniae (40.3%), Escherichia coli (28.1%) and Enterobacter spp. (18.7%). The blaNDM gene was identified in 55.4% of CRE isolates, blaOXA-48-like in 25.2% and both carbapenemases in 12.2%. 88.5% of CRE isolates were colistin susceptible, and 62.2% of them were ceftazidime-avibactam susceptible (significantly less among blaNDM producers, p < 0.001). Independent predictors of CRE acquisition were prior carbapenem use (adjusted OR 4.1; 95% CI 2.3–7.2), ICU stay >7 days (aOR 3.2; 95% CI 1.9–5.4), and mechanical ventilation (aOR 2.6; 95% CI 1.5–4.6).

      NDM was the most common carbapenemase and the prevalence of CRE in the ICU was significant. Ceftazidime-avibactam was still active, particularly against the NDM producers. Active surveillance, contact precaution bundles and antimicrobial stewardship are all needed now. The results correlate with the national AMRSN standards and highlight the importance of prompt genotypic characterisation for prompt salvage therapy

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

World Health Organization. Antimicrobial resistance: global report on surveillance. Geneva: WHO Press; 2014.

World Health Organization. Global priority list of antibiotic-resistant bacteria to guide research, discovery, and development of new antibiotics. Geneva: WHO; 2017.

Falagas ME, Tansarli GS, Karageorgopoulos DE, Vardakas KZ. Deaths attributable to carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae infections. Emerg Infect Dis. 2014;20(7):1170-5.

Magill SS, Edwards JR, Bamberg W, et al. Multistate point-prevalence survey of health care-associated infections. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(13):1198-208.

Indian Council of Medical Research. ICMR Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance Network Annual Report 2022. New Delhi: ICMR; 2023.

Yong D, Toleman MA, Giske CG, et al. Characterization of a new metallo-beta-lactamase gene, blaNDM-1, and a novel erythromycin esterase gene carried on a unique genetic structure in Klebsiella pneumoniae. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2009;53(12):5046-54.

Dortet L, Poirel L, Nordmann P. Worldwide dissemination of the NDM-type carbapenemases in Gram-negative bacteria. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:249856.

Shields RK, Nguyen MH, Chen L, et al. Ceftazidime-avibactam is superior to other treatment regimens against carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae bacteremia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2017;61(8):e00883-17.

Marshall S, Hujer AM, Rojas LJ, et al. Can ceftazidime-avibactam and aztreonam overcome beta-lactam resistance conferred by metallo-beta-lactamases in Enterobacteriaceae? Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2017;61(4):e02243-16.

Taneja N, Kaur H. Insights into newer antimicrobial agents against Gram-negative bacteria. Microbiol Insights. 2016;9:9-19.

Abhilash KP, Veeraraghavan B, Abraham OC. Epidemiology, risk factors and clinical outcomes of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae infections in a tertiary care hospital in South India. J Assoc Physicians India. 2010;58 Suppl:13-6.

Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. 34th ed. CLSI Supplement M100. Wayne, PA: CLSI; 2024.

Poirel L, Potron A, Nordmann P. OXA-48-like carbapenemases: the phantom menace. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2012;67(7):1597-606.

Gandra S, Tseng KK, Bhowmik A, et al. The mortality burden of multidrug-resistant pathogens in India: a retrospective, observational study. Clin Infect Dis. 2019;69(4):563-70.

Pragasam AK, Vijayakumar S, Bakthavatchalam YD, et al. Molecular epidemiology of colistin resistance in Klebsiella pneumoniae and Escherichia coli from bloodstream infections in India. Front Microbiol. 2020;11:575826.

Pogue JM, Ortwine JK, Bhatt P, Patel AC, Khuu P. Dose optimization of polymyxin antibiotics: strategies for continuous infusion and weighing efficacy versus toxicity. Infect Dis Ther. 2020;9(3):487-511.

Peleg AY, Hooper DC. Hospital-acquired infections due to gram-negative bacteria. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(19):1804-13.

Downloads

Published

2021-08-24

How to Cite

Phenotypic and Genotypic Characterisation of Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacterales Isolated from Intensive Care Unit Specimens: A Cross-Sectional Study at a Tertiary Care Hospital (Dr. Arockiaamalareena A , Trans.). (2021). Cuestiones De Fisioterapia, 50(3), 261-272. https://doi.org/10.48047/jadf7k91