Emergence of carbapenem-hydrolysing metallo-?-lactamase VIM-1 in Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates in France

Dispersal of Carbapenemase bla VIM-1 Gene Associated with Different Tn 402 Variants, Mercury Transposons, and Conjugative Plasmids in Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa

“…Although bla VIM-2 and bla VIM-1 have been predominant among P. aeruginosa and Enterobacteriaceae strains, respectively, our results show that both genes have the potential to be located in different platforms suitable for successful dissemination and eventually favored by recombination events. Moreover, the diversity of platforms associated with bla VIM-1 may facilitate the rapid spread of this allele among P. aeruginosa isolates (7,8,10,13,28,39).…”

Fosfomycin for the treatment of infections caused by multidrug-resistant non-fermenting Gram-negative bacilli: a systematic review of microbiological, animal and clinical studies

“…Eleven studies included non-fermenting Gram-negative isolates originating from France [9,10,12,15,20,[23][24][25][26]28,29], three studies included isolates originating from Japan [11,17,18], two from Italy [19,30] and one each from Thailand [16], Taiwan [14], Greece [8], Spain [27], the UK [22], Germany [21] and Bulgaria [13]. Fifteen of the twenty-three studies reported on the site of isolation of the isolates examined [9,10,12,13,15,[17][18][19][20][21]23,25,26,29,30].…”

“…Fifteen of the twenty-three studies reported on the site of isolation of the isolates examined [9,10,12,13,15,[17][18][19][20][21]23,25,26,29,30]. Ten studies evaluated susceptibility to fosfomycin according to the disk diffusion method [9,15,16,21,[24][25][26][28][29][30] and three studies each according to the agar dilution method [8,12,20], the broth microdilution method [17,18,27] and Etest [13,14,22], whilst three studies did not state the method of determination of fosfomycin susceptibility [10,19,23]. In one study more than one test method was used to determine susceptibility to fosfomycin [11]; in this study, the Etest method was selected to evaluate fosfomycin susceptibility, as the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) does not recommend the relevant broth dilution methods [39].…”

“…Regarding the interpretative MIC breakpoints of susceptibility to fosfomycin used, eight studies used a susceptibility breakpoint of ≤64 mg/L [8,11,12,14,16,17,21,27], four studies used a breakpoint of ≤32 mg/L [23,24,28,29], one study used a breakpoint of ≤16 mg/L [18], whereas specific data were not reported in 10 studies [9,10,13,15,19,20,22,25,26,30]. The majority of the latter (six of ten) were performed in France [9,10,15,20,25,26].…”

“…The majority of the latter (six of ten) were performed in France [9,10,15,20,25,26]. In total, 1859 MDR non-fermenting Gram-negative bacilli M a n u s c r i p t were analysed, of which 1743 (93.8%) were P. aeruginosa isolates [8][9][10][11][12][14][15][16][18][19][20][21][23][24][25][26][28][29][30], 85 (4.6%) were A. baumannii [8,13,17,27] and 31 (1.7%) were Burkholderia spp. [22].…”