Evidence Hub

The rise of ampicillin-resistant Enterococcus faecium high-risk clones as a frequent intestinal colonizer in oncohaematological neutropenic patients on levofloxacin prophylaxis: a risk for bacteraemia?

Sánchez-Díaz AM, Cuartero C, Rodríguez JD, Lozano S, Alonso JM, Rodríguez-Domínguez M, Tedim AP, Del Campo R et al.

Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, 2016

52 participants

Abstract

Levofloxacin extended prophylaxis (LEP), recommended in oncohaematological neutropenic patients to reduce infections, might select resistant bacteria in the intestine acting as a source of endogenous infection. In a prospective observational study we evaluated intestinal emergence and persistence of ampicillin-resistant Enterococcus faecium (AREfm), a marker of hospital adapted high-risk clones. AREfm was recovered from the faeces of 52 patients with prolonged neutropenia after chemotherapy, at admission (Basal), during LEP, and twice weekly until discharge (Pos-LEP). Antibiotic susceptibility, virulence traits and population structure (pulsed-field gel electrophoresis and multilocus sequence typing) were determined and compared with bacteraemic isolates. Gut enterococcal population was monitored using a quantitative PCR quantification approach. AREfm colonized 61.4% of patients (194/482 faecal samples). Sequential AREfm acquisition (25% Basal, 36.5% LEP, 50% Pos-LEP) and high persistent colonization rates (76.9-89.5%) associated with a decrease in clonal diversity were demonstrated. Isolates were clustered into 24 PFGE-patterns within 13 sequence types, 95.8% of them belonging to hospital-associated Bayesian analysis of population structure subgroups 2.1a and 3.3a. Levofloxacin resistance and high-level streptomycin resistance were a common trait of these high-risk clones. AREfm-ST117, the most persistent clone, was dominant (60.0% isolates, 32.6% patients). It presented…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 52 participants or records.

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