4.7 Article

Intestinal Colonization Traits of Pandemic Multidrug-Resistant Escherichia coli ST131

期刊

JOURNAL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES
卷 218, 期 6, 页码 979-990

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jiy031

关键词

E. coli ST131; intestinal colonization; type 1 fimbriae; fimH; multidrug resistance

资金

  1. Australian National Health and Medical Research Council [APP1069370, APP1106930]
  2. Queensland University of Technology
  3. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
  4. European Commission

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Epidemiological studies point to the gut as a key reservoir of multidrug resistant Escherichia coli multilocus sequence type 131 (ST131), a globally dominant pathogenic clone causing urinary tract and bloodstream infections. Here we report a detailed investigation of its intestinal lifestyle. Methods. Clinical ST131 isolates and type 1 fimbriae null mutants were assessed for colonization of human intestinal epithelia and in mouse intestinal colonization models. Mouse gut tissue underwent histologic analysis for pathology and ST131 localization. Key findings were corroborated in mucus-producing human cell lines and intestinal biopsy specimens. Results. ST131 strains adhered to and invaded human intestinal epithelial cells more than probiotic and commensal strains. The reference ST131 strain EC958 established persistent intestinal colonization in mice, and expression of type 1 fimbriae mediated higher colonization levels. Bacterial loads were highest in the distal parts of the mouse intestine and did not cause any obvious pathology. Further analysis revealed that EC958 could bind to both mucus and underlying human intestinal epithelia. Conclusions. ST131 strains can efficiently colonize the mammalian gut and persist long term. Type 1 fimbriae enhance ST131 intestinal colonization, suggesting that mannosides, currently developed as therapeutics for bladder infections and Crohn's disease, could also be used to limit intestinal ST131 reservoirs.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据