Evidence Hub

Quantifying the contribution of four resistance mechanisms to ciprofloxacin MIC in Escherichia coli : a systematic review

Boas C.L. van der Putten, Daniel Remondini, Giovanni Pasquini, Victoria A. Janes, Sébastien Matamoros, Constance Schultsz

Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, 2018

51 citations

Abstract

Background: Reviews assessing the genetic basis of ciprofloxacin resistance in Escherichia coli have mostly been qualitative. However, to predict resistance phenotypes based on genotypic characteristics, it is essential to quantify the contribution of genotypic determinants to resistance. Objectives: We performed a systematic review to assess the relative contribution of known genomic resistance determinants to the MIC of ciprofloxacin in E. coli. Methods: PubMed and Web of Science were searched for English language studies that assessed ciprofloxacin MIC and presence or introduction of genetic determinants of ciprofloxacin resistance in E. coli. We included experimental and observational studies without time restrictions. Medians and ranges of MIC fold changes were calculated for individual resistance determinants and combinations thereof. Results: We included 66 studies, describing 604 E. coli isolates that carried at least one genetic ciprofloxacin resistance determinant. Mutations in gyrA and parC, genes encoding targets of ciprofloxacin, contribute to the largest fold changes in ciprofloxacin resistance in E. coli compared with the WT. Efflux and physical blocking or enzymatic modifications confer smaller increases in ciprofloxacin MIC than mutations in gyrA and parC. However, the presence of these other resistance mechanisms in addition to target alteration mutations further increases ciprofloxacin MIC, thus resulting in ciprofloxacin MIC increases ranging from 250- to…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free