Resistance mechanisms and clinical characteristics of linezolid-resistant Enterococcus faecium isolates: A single-centre study in South Korea. (March 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Cho, Sun Young; Kim, Hye Mee; Chung, Doo Ryeon; Kim, So Hyun; Huh, Hee Jae; Kang, Cheol-In; Peck, Kyong Ran; Lee, Nam Yong; Song, Jae-Hoon
• Is Part Of: Journal of global antimicrobial resistance. Volume 12(2018)
• Page Start: 44
• Page End: 47
• Publication Date: 2018-03
• Subjects: Vancomycin-resistant enterococci -- Linezolid -- Resistance -- Prevalence; Drug resistance -- Periodicals; Drug resistance -- Periodicals; Drug resistance; Periodicals; 616.9041
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jgar.2017.09.009
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2213-7165

Abstract

Highlights: Data on linezolid resistance in vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium (VREF) are limited. Among 389 VREF isolates, 7 (1.8%) exhibited resistance to linezolid. Two linezolid-resistant (LR)-VREF isolates from patients with previous linezolid exposure contained the G2576T mutation. Five isolates recovered from linezolid-naïve patients contained no known linezolid resistance mechanism. Linezolid use and horizontal transmission appear to be responsible for acquisition of LR-VREF. Abstract: Objectives: This study aimed to determine the prevalence of linezolid-resistant (LR) vancomycin-resistant enterococci and to investigate the mechanisms of linezolid resistance with clinical and microbiological characterisation. Methods: All vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium (VREF) isolated from blood and rectal swab cultures during 2012–2015 were tested for linezolid resistance. LR-VREF isolates were tested for antimicrobial susceptibility, glycopeptide resistance genes and virulence genes. Multilocus sequence typing (MLST) and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) were performed. Isolates were tested for known mechanisms of linezolid resistance. Results: Among 389 VREF isolates, 7 (1.8%) were found to be resistant to linezolid. All LR-VREF isolates carried the vanA gene. Five isolates had both hyl and esp genes. The isolates were susceptible to tigecycline, daptomycin and quinupristin/dalfopristin, except for one isolate with daptomycin resistance. Two LR-VREF isolates recovered from patients with previous linezolid exposure contained the G2576T mutation in 23S rRNA and exhibited high-level resistance to linezolid (MIC > 64 mg/L). The other five isolates recovered from linezolid-naïve patients revealed no known linezolid resistance mechanism and exhibited low-level resistance to linezolid (MICs = 8–16 mg/L). Plasmid-mediated genes encoding cfr or optrA were not detected. LR-VREF isolates were represented by six different sequence types, belonging to hospital lineages, and were assigned to seven PFGE types. Conclusions: The prevalence of LR-VREF in this centre was low. Both linezolid exposure and horizontal transmission appear to be responsible for acquisition of LR-VREF in hospitalised patients. Prudent use of linezolid and improved infection control strategies are needed to limit the spread of LR-VREF.