Evidence Hub

Two Multidrug-Resistant Escherichia coli Isolates from Blood Cultures After Cervical Conization in a Patient with Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia Grade II: Phenotypic and Genomic Characterization

Zhang J, Liu X, Liu L, Fan Y, Sun Z, Li M, Xiong Y, Liu Z et al.

Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland), 2026

Abstract

Patients undergoing cervical conization for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade II (CIN II) may develop postoperative bloodstream infections (BSIs), and multidrug-resistant (MDR) Escherichia coli isolates with distinct resistance profiles can complicate antimicrobial management. In this case-based study, two E. coli strains, HBFY-1 and HBFY-2, were recovered from blood cultures obtained from a 38-year-old CIN II patient with postoperative fever. The isolates were characterized by antimicrobial susceptibility testing, whole-genome sequencing, conjugation assays, and comparative genomics against publicly available genomes matched by sequence type and serotype. Fever occurred on postoperative day 2. HBFY-1 was fluoroquinolone-resistant; belonged to ST744/O101:H9; carried the extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL) gene blaCTX-M-27; was phenotypically confirmed as an ESBL producer; and grouped within a multi-source near-neighbor clade consistent with a conserved fluoroquinolone-associated resistance backbone in ST744/O101:H9. HBFY-2 was carbapenem-resistant; belonged to ST48/O113:H32; carried blaNDM-5 on an IncY-associated plasmid bin; was phenotypically confirmed as a metallo-carbapenemase producer; and did not harbor any ESBL gene. Within the matched ST48/O113:H32 dataset, blaNDM-5 was detected only in HBFY-2, which clustered within an Asia-enriched lineage, including China-derived human and swine genomes. The blaCTX-M-27-associated and blaNDM-5-associated elements were…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case report, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

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