4.7 Article

Carbapenem Nonsusceptible Klebsiella pneumoniae in Taiwan: Dissemination and Increasing Resistance of Carbapenemase Producers During 2012-2015

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 8, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-26691-z

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Ministry of Science and Technology, R.O.C. [MOST 103-2314-B-016-020-MY3]
  2. Taiwan Centers for Disease Control [MOHW 104-CDC-C-114-144406]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Before 2011, the prevalence rates of carbapenemase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae (CPKP) among carbapenem nonsusceptible K. pneumoniae (CnSKP) isolates were below 10% in Taiwan. The study presents the dissemination and increased antimicrobial resistance of CPKP from January 2012 to August 2015, as shown by Taiwanese multicenter surveillance. Isolates with minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of > 1 mu g/mL for imipenem or meropenem were collected, screened for various carbapenemase genes by PCR, and tested for antimicrobial susceptibility. Among 1,457 CnSKP isolates, 1,250 were collected from medical centers. The CnSKP prevalence in medical centers increased by 1.7-fold during the study. Among all CnSKP isolates, 457 were CPKP. The CPKP rate among CnSKP increased by 1.5-fold and reached 36.8% in 2015. The CPKP nonsusceptibility rate to aztreonam, fluoroquinolones, and aminoglycosides increased yearly. Six CPKP isolates carried dual carbapenemase genes. Three Ambler classes were identified in 451 isolates with a single carbapenemase: classes A (315 bla(KPC-2), 2 bla(KPC-3), 28 bla(KPC-17), 2 bla(KPC-34)), B (26 bla(IMP-8), 2 bla(NDM-1), 36 bla(VIM-1)), and D (40 bla(OXA-48)). The bla(OXA-48) rate among CPKP increased by 6-fold over three years. Most KPC and OXA-48 producers were ST11. CnSKP was increasingly prevalent, owing to CPKP dissemination. Additionally, CPKP became more resistant during the study period.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available