SUMMARY
Proteus spp. are members of the Enterobacterales order and are widely found in humans, animals, and the environment. Some species, particularly P. mirabilis, are highly pathogenic and are among the most frequent causes of urinary tract and bloodstream infections. Proteus spp. possess a variety of virulence factors, such as swarming and urease activity, leading to persistent and severe infections. An increasing resistance to antibiotics has been reported for isolates and poses a substantial threat to global health. In recent years, several new Proteus spp. have been described, but their potential as pathogens has not yet been determined. Here, we provide an update on the taxonomy, virulence factors, and antibiotic resistance of Proteus spp.
KEYWORDS: antibiotic resistance, Proteus mirabilis, carbapenems, taxonomy, biofilms, urinary tract infection, virulence, pathogens
INTRODUCTION
Proteus spp. belong to the family Morganellaceae in the order of Enterobacterales (1, 2). They are gram-negative rods with a diameter of 0.4–0.8 µm. The cells can present as swimmer or swarmer cells, with swimmer cells having a length of 1–4 µm and swarmer cells up to 80 µm (3, 4). Proteus spp. are highly relevant pathogens that cause urinary tract infections, bloodstream infections, and other infections in humans and animals (5–11). Additionally, they are present in the gastrointestinal tract of vertebrates (12–14) and invertebrates (13, 15, 16) and in a wide diversity of habitats, such as wastewater or soil (17–19). In recent years, antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has been increasingly reported in Proteus spp. (20–22), which is a threat to global health (23, 24). Members of the Proteus genus have, however, also been found to be promising candidates for bioremediation (25–27).
This review aims to give an overview of the history of the discovery, identification, and taxonomy of Proteus spp., their clinical relevance, as well as unique characteristics such as swarming and biofilm formation. Virulence factors, AMR acquisition, and potential for bioremediation will be elucidated to put this extraordinary genus into perspective.
The changeful history of Proteus taxonomy
The first two Proteus spp. were described in 1885 by the German bacteriologist Gustav Hauser as Proteus mirabilis and Proteus vulgaris (see Fig. 1). Both were able to liquefy gelatin and exhibit swarming behavior (28). Hauser differentiated the two species by the rate of gelatin liquefaction: P. vulgaris was a more rapid liquefier compared to P. mirabilis. The name Proteus was inspired by the prophetic sea god in Greek mythology, “Proteus,” who was able to change his shape and thus was, similar to members of the Proteus spp., versatile in appearance. Hauser described Proteus zenkeri at the same time but rescinded this finding in 1892 (29).
Fig 1.
Timeline of Proteus phylogeny. Proteus appendicitidis, as the newest addition to the Proteus genus, has not yet been validly published.
In 1966, Cosenza and Podgwaite (30) obtained new isolates from gypsy moth larvae, which were named as the new species Proteus myxofaciens. This species, however, was found to represent a new genus, Cosenzaea, in 2011 by Giammanco et al. (31), thus naming it Cosenzaea myxofaciens comb. nov. In 2021, Behrendt et al. (32) reevaluated the taxonomy and nomenclature and proposed to preferably use the name Proteus myxofaciens. To date, both species names are validly published and hence constitute synonyms (2).
The species originally named P. vulgaris, representing the type species of the genus Proteus, was found to be heterogeneous and consists of three biogroups based on their ability to metabolize indole, salicine, and esculin, as well as their chloramphenicol sensitivity (33, 34). While members of biogroup 1 cannot metabolize any of these compounds and are chloramphenicol resistant, members of biogroup 2 are able to metabolize all three and are chloramphenicol sensitive. Members of biogroup 3 are able to metabolize indole, but not salicine and esculin. While a subgroup corresponding to the later-defined biogroup 1 was first defined by Brenner in 1978 (33, 34), Hickman in 1982 defined the other two biogroups and proposed naming biogroup 1 Proteus penneri, in honor of John Penner, a Canadian microbiologist (33, 34) (with the type strain CDC 1808-73 = ATCC 33519). In 1995, Brenner et al. determined P. vulgaris biogroup 3 to consist of four genomospecies (genomospecies 3–6) using DNA relatedness studies (35). Notably, genomospecies 3 consisted of only two strains: one strain at that time serving as the neotype culture of the type strain, originating in the Pribram Collection in Vienna (ATCC 13315 = NCTC 4175) (35), and another strain (CDC 1732-80 = ATCC 700826). Since both strains did not represent the genomospecies that was most frequently isolated from human urine and did not adequately represent most of the P. vulgaris strains described in the literature at that point in time, Brenner et al. (35) proposed replacing the original type strain of P. vulgaris with the type strain CDC PR1 = ATCC 29905 of biogroup 2. This proposal was granted in 1999 (36). Genomospecies 3, the group containing the original P. vulgaris type strain ATCC 13315, was proposed to be reclassified as Proteus hauseri in honor of Hauser by O’Hara et al. in 2000 (37), but with CDC 1732-80 = ATCC 700826 as the type strain. At the time, genomospecies 4, 5, and 6 remained unassigned to a Proteus species. Since 2015, several species have been added to the genus: Proteus terrae and Proteus cibarius in 2015 and 2016, respectively (18, 38). These two species have later been found to be heterotypic synonyms of genomospecies 5 by Dai et al. (39), who used multilocus sequence analysis and confirmed by Behrendt et al. (32) using genome-based phylogeny. These species, including genomospecies 5, were all incorporated into P. terrae, and two subspecies instead of two species were created, P. terrae subsp. terrae and P. terrae subsp. cibarius (32, 39). In parallel, Dai et al. (39) first characterized the species Proteus alimentorum, Proteus columbae, Proteus faecis, and Proteus cibi in 2018 and 2019 (40–42). P. appendicitidis, as the newest addition to the genus, was described by He et al. in 2024 (43) (see Fig. 2) but has not been validly published in the List of Prokaryotic names with Standing in Nomenclature so far.
Fig 2.
Phylogenetic tree of all Proteus type strains described to date, based on whole genome sequences, analysis performed by Tygs web services (44), and imaged using iTOL (45).
In addition to the taxonomy of Proteus at species level, the diverse order “Enterobacterales” was reclassified in 2016 by Adelou et al. (46). They divided it into seven distinct families, placing the genus Proteus into the Morganellaceae family, together with Morganella spp., Providencia spp., and others.
Significance of Proteus spp. and their habitats
The field of Proteus research has grown significantly in the last few years. In just 10 years, five new species within the genus have been described. Hence, the significance of a single species has yet to be determined. As of 2024, P. mirabilis is the most intensively investigated species of the Proteus genus and appears to be the most clinically prevalent species, judging from the amount of accessible genome sequences at NCBI (47). Around 93% of genomes openly accessible have been assigned to P. mirabilis, followed by approximately 2% unidentified Proteus sp., 2% P. terrae, and 1% P. vulgaris. This signifies the research focus, which has been primarily on P. mirabilis as a human pathogen.
This notion is enforced by the origin of isolates accessible via NCBI BioSamples: the majority (approximately 95%) is of human origin, with 2% originating from swine and chicken, respectively. The majority of specimens have been obtained in the clinical context, e.g., urine, blood, sputum, or fecal swabs, underlining the clinical relevance of Proteus spp.
It can be assumed, however, that not all of the reported strains have been characterized correctly, since the differentiation of closely related Proteus spp. is challenging. For many isolates, species-level identification was performed when not all species we know today had already been described. Moreover, these findings might be biased toward P. mirabilis as the most clinically relevant species.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE OF PROTEUS SPP.
Proteus is considered a constituent (<0.05%) of the healthy human gut microbiome (48), but it can also cause serious infections in humans due to the presence of urease as a characteristic of the genus and other virulence factors. The majority of Proteus infections are caused by P. mirabilis (49, 50), but infections by other Proteus spp., such as P. vulgaris, P. hauseri, P. penneri (51, 52), as well as P. alimentorum (53), have been reported. P. mirabilis is a common cause of both community-acquired urinary tract infections (UTIs) (2% of these UTIs were caused by P. mirabilis) (54), hospital-acquired UTIs (9.4%) (55), and complicated UTIs (2.4%–35%), secondary to catheterization (56, 57). P. mirabilis has been recognized as causing cystitis (58), pyelonephritis (59, 60), prostatitis (61, 62), wound infections (51), and burn infections (63). Secondary to UTI and catheter-associated UTIs (CAUTIs), it is a common cause for bacteremia (64–66). P. mirabilis has also been implicated in the emergence of rheumatoid arthritis (67, 68). P. vulgaris and P. penneri have, similarly to P. mirabilis, been isolated from UTIs, wound and burn infections, as well as bloodstream infections and respiratory tract infections (69–77).
Proteus in UTIs
Proteus spp. have been reported as a cause for UTI from as early as 1892, where they were reported to be highly pathogenic to rabbits and causing “intense nephritis with abscesses in the kidneys” (78). P. mirabilis is the species most commonly reported from UTI, and relatively little data are available on other Proteus spp. UTIs are frequent in the human population, with approximately 50%–60% of women suffering a UTI in their lifetime (79). In both uncomplicated and complicated UTIs, P. mirabilis is found as a causative agent in 2%–4% of cases (54, 80–82), representing the third most frequent gram-negative species causing UTI (after Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae). P. mirabilis is, however, more prevalent in CAUTIs (5, 11, 56, 58, 83). CAUTIs are UTIs resulting from the often long-term use of a catheter, as frequently seen in nursing homes and hospitals (84). UTIs are the most common nosocomial infection, with approximately 80% of these being CAUTIs (85, 86). In CAUTIs, P. mirabilis has been shown to be present in 26.4% of the cases of mono-bacterial infections and in 35% of poly-microbial infections, making it one of the most frequent species causing CAUTIs (56).
The route of infection in CAUTIs is often explained by the presence of fecal contaminants or skin residents in the periurethral area (87–91). Bacteria can enter the urinary tract either directly via catheter insertion, through the catheter lumen, or along the catheter-urethral surface (92). It is notable that P. mirabilis has been shown to have the highest capability of adhering to catheters compared to a group of several other gram-negative bacteria (93). Within the bladder, the use of a catheter often leads to the retention of urine (10–100 mL), resulting in a reservoir for bacteria to prosper (94). P. mirabilis is an avid former of biofilm and can adhere to the surface of catheters, as well as swarm (95–99). These capabilities make Proteus spp. one of the biggest threats in CAUTIs, as they can both swarm through catheters, invading the urinary tract, and also use the presence of the catheter to form protective biofilm (100, 101). Once in the bladder, P. mirabilis has been shown to be effective in invading host cells (102). While the invasion success is highly dependent on the particular strain, as well as the environmental conditions, P. mirabilis can display invasion rates higher than other invading pathogens, such as Salmonella enterica Serovar Typhimurium, E. coli, and Klebsiella pneumoniae (102–104). In contrast to E. coli, P. mirabilis does not establish larger intracellular populations in the host cells but rather appears to use the host cells as a place for initial replication and survival, before re-entering the bladder lumen and forming multicellular aggregates (105–108). These aggregates have been demonstrated to protect the incorporated bacteria from invasion by the host’s neutrophils and thus prove an effective immune system evasion technique (106). Aggregation and biofilm formation have also been linked with phenotypic resistance to antibiotics and hindered treatment, despite a genetic susceptibility to antibiotics, once again underlining the clinical significance of Proteus spp. infections (109–113).
During infection in the bladder, P. mirabilis causes inflammation and submucosal edema, leading to cystitis, which is, in general, more severe in CAUTIs compared to UTIs (114, 115). P. mirabilis UTIs are strongly correlated with the formation of bladder and kidney stones (106, 116–118) since P. mirabilis produces higher amounts of urease compared to other species commonly found in UTIs such as E. coli, Klebsiella oxytoca, Staphylococcus saprophyticus, and Enterococcus faecalis (119). A comparison of several P. mirabilis strains with representative strains of Providencia stuartii, Providencia rettgeri, and Morganella morganii revealed an appreciably higher urease activity of P. mirabilis strains despite substantially lower substrate affinities (120). The urease activity is, in some cases, even increased in polymicrobial infection (114). Urease catalyzes the hydrolysis of urea into carbon dioxide and ammonia, increasing the pH in the environment (121). The pH increase can lead to the precipitation of calcium phosphate and magnesium-ammonium phosphate and the subsequent formation of carbonate apatite and struvite crystals (122–124). These crystals can be integrated into crystalline biofilm or obstruct the urinary flow through the catheter, leading to the retention of urine, bacteriuria, and facilitating ascension of bacteria into the kidneys (125–127). In long-term catheterized patients, approximately 50% experience catheter blockage due to crystal formation (5, 95, 128). Proteus spp. have been isolated in 70% of bacteria-induced stone formation (129).
When ascending into the kidney, P. mirabilis frequently causes kidney stones and can lead to more severe kidney damage than other pathogens (114, 115). It proliferates within the tubular epithelium of the kidneys and can result in both necrosis and nephrosis, as well as inflammatory lesions (114, 130). If the infection cannot be treated in a timely manner, permanent renal damage can be caused. Moreover, UTIs can progress to bacteremia and sepsis, which, interestingly, is more often observed in polymicrobial infections (114, 128). The mortality of patients with UTI caused by P. mirabilis has been studied in-depth by Chen et al. (9). The overall mortality rate of 191 patients with P. mirabilis bacteremic and non-bacteremic UTIs was found to be 8.9%, while bacteremic patients’ mortality rate was 16.4%. In comparison, the mortality rate of urosepsis caused by E. coli has been reported to be 12.8% (131). In a study investigating community-acquired mono-microbial bacteremia, E. coli was detected in 72.3% of cases, Klebsiella in 24.9%, and Proteus spp. in 2.7%. Mortality rates reported were similar to the rates reported by Chen et al., with 7.6%, 18.3%, and 16.1% for E. coli, Klebsiella, and Proteus, respectively, once again underlining the severity of Proteus infections (132).
Proteus spp. as pathogens in the gastrointestinal tract
Proteus spp. have been linked to gastrointestinal diseases in a variety of cases, ranging from diarrhea and food poisoning to Crohn’s disease (133–135). Notably, research into Proteus as a gastrointestinal pathogen is still relatively young and might yield more insights on Proteus and gastrointestinal health (136). Proteus spp. are, as mentioned earlier, known human gut commensals. Studies have shown that the alteration of relative gut microbe abundances is often linked to an altered state of health in patients (137). Such alterations in relative abundances have also been described for Proteus spp. in a variety of cases.
P. mirabilis, for example, has been isolated in patients with diarrhea more often (10.8% of samples) than in healthy patients (2.7% of cases) (133), while the presence of P. vulgaris is generally associated with gastrointestinal symptoms (138). In Crohn’s disease, more pathogenic bacteria have been found in the small bowel serosa in affected patients than in healthy patients (27% and 15%, respectively), 33% of which included Proteus spp. (139). A microarray-based study by Mondot et al. (140) highlighted the overrepresentation of Proteus spp., especially P. vulgaris, in Crohn’s patients. In stool samples and colonic mucosa, Proteus spp. have been found to be enriched, with 18.5% of samples from Crohn’s disease patients containing Proteus, compared to 5.6% in the control group (141). Moreover, the presence of Proteus spp. favors the postoperative recurrence of Crohn’s disease (140, 142).
Proteus spp. have furthermore been linked to foodborne gastroenteritis, cirrhosis, and pancreatic infections (134, 135, 143–145). Proteus biofilm was found in 10 of 81 stents removed from patients (age range 20–86 years) with bile duct stones (n = 46, 56.8%), benign strictures (n = 29, 35.8%), and malignant strictures (n = 6, 7.4%) (146). In all of these 10 stents, Proteus formed a polymicrobial biofilm with, e.g., Klebsiella spp. or Pseudomonas spp. Unfortunately, in this specific study, there was no further investigation into the composition of biofilm formers and their influence on disease progression or the influence of the underlying cause for stent placement on the biofilm composition. Together with K. pneumoniae, P. mirabilis has been demonstrated to elicit colitis in murine models. Additionally, it has been shown that a high P. mirabilis burden correlates with the presence of colitis (147). Proteus spp. can, partly due to their ability to form biofilms, colonize medical devices in the gastrointestinal tract, such as shunts, stents, and nasogastric tubes (148–152), and can contaminate gastroscopes and colonoscopes (153). Gastrointestinal carriage of Proteus spp. can also lead to Proteus infections in other parts of the body, such as the urinary tract (154).
Proteus and rheumatoid arthritis
Proteus has been linked to rheumatoid arthritis (RA), a chronic inflammatory disorder affecting 0.5–1% of humans worldwide (155, 156). In 1971, Chandler et al. (157) reported increased titers of antibodies against Proteus in RA patients. This finding has been replicated in several studies worldwide. In 1992 and 1995, Ebringer et al. (158) and Wilson et al. (159), respectively, found homologies in HLA-DR4 antigen associated with RA and P. mirabilis hemolysin, as well as in type XI collagen and P. mirabilis urease (158, 159). The sequences in question are EQRRAA/ESRRAL and LRREI/IRRET. In 1999, cross-reactivities between synthetic Proteus hemolysin peptides with HLA-DR1/DR4 antigens and synthetic urease peptides and collagen antigens were reported (160), a finding strengthened by Wilson et al. (161) in 2003, demonstrating the lysis of red blood cells coated with HLA-DR4/1-containing EQRRAA by anti ESRRAL-Proteus antibodies. The notion that Proteus UTIs and RA are linked was further substantiated by studies reporting P. mirabilis to be the most common microbe found in the urine of RA patients and studies confirming an increased abundance of anti-Proteus antibodies in RA patients worldwide (161–163). The mechanism behind this link between bacteria and RA was proposed by Ebringer and Rashid (67) as follows: Proteus infects the host and leads to a UTI, triggering the generation of anti-Proteus antibodies. These antibodies cross-react with the aforementioned motifs in collagen and HLA-DR4/1, leading to local reactions and the release of auto-antigenic materials, which in turn lead to the production of auto-antibodies.
In a recent study, the comparison of urine microbiota of RA patients and healthy individuals has shown that RA patients exhibit a significantly higher microbial richness and that, among others, Proteus spp. are enriched (164). Moreover, a new putative cross-reaction pair has been found recently: antibodies against P. mirabilis O3 lipopolysaccharide appear to react with collagen type I (165).
VIRULENCE AND THERAPEUTIC APPROACHES
Swarming, adhesion, and biofilm formation
Proteus spp. are well-known for their ability to swarm very efficiently (see Fig. 3). While other bacteria, such as E. coli and P. aeruginosa, are also able to swarm (166), Proteus spp. can do so under a wide variety of conditions and at much higher agar concentrations compared to other species (167, 168). Swarming behavior on 1.5% agar has been reported for all Proteus type strains to date, with the exception of the P. penneri type strain ATCC 33519T (41, 43). Proteus cells show a dimorphism as elongated, multi-nucleated and multi-flagellated “swarming” cells and as short, mononucleated “swimming” cells with 6–10 peritrichious flagella (169, 170). Swarming depends strongly on environmental conditions, such as the availability of carbon and nitrogen sources or NaCl (168). Several patterns of swarming have been described (171), but an in-depth analysis of the impact species and genotype have on swarming patterns remains to be done. Often, their swarming on the plate consists of swarming phases and consolidation phases, resulting in the characteristic bull’s-eye pattern (172) (Fig. 3B). In the context of infection, there is evidence that P. mirabilis swarming cells are better able to invade uroepithelial cells, with a 15-fold higher invasion rate than vegetative cells, possibly due to an increased cytolytic activity related to higher levels of hemolysin production (108). In contrast, non-swarming mutants have been found to be less infective in murine models (173). Moreover, P. mirabilis has been found to be capable of swarming rapidly over urinary catheters at a rate of 10 cm in 24 h, accentuating this genus’ serious role in host colonization in catheterized patients (96).
Fig 3.
Swarming phenotypes of different Proteus isolates on blood agar. Shown is the phenotype of colonies after 24 h. (A) Non-swarming isolate of P. hauseri sampled from dog feces, (B) bull’s-eye pattern of swarming P. terrae sampled from water, (C and E) root-like structures seen in swarming P. terrae sampled from water, (D) P. terrae sampled from dog feces swarming irregularly, and (F) unilateral, thin swarming layer produced by P. terrae isolate from dog feces.
Adhesion of Proteus spp. cells to both host cells and other surfaces plays an important role in both infection and biofilm formation (174, 175). Adhesion occurs through both fimbriae and non-fimbrial adhesins. In P. mirabilis strain HI4320, 17 gene clusters for the expression of fimbrial proteins have been found (176). Uropathogenic E. coli CFT073 harbors 12 such gene clusters in its genome (177–179). Fimbriae investigated in P. mirabilis include the mannose-resistant Proteus-like fimbriae (MR/P), uroepithelial cell adhesin, also called nonagglutinating fimbriae, P. mirabilis fimbriae, and several others, which have been implicated in biofilm formation, colonization of the urinary tract, and CAUTIs (175, 180–189) (see Table 1 for an overview of important virulence genes in P. mirabilis). Next to P. mirabilis, adhesion to human uroepithelial cells has been demonstrated for P. vulgaris isolates (190). P. vulgaris has also been described to adhere to other surfaces, such as catheters and stainless steel (191, 192). For P. penneri, the expression of fimbriae associated with adhesion and biofilm formation has been shown (193).
TABLE 1.
Virulence genes of P. mirabilis with their corresponding protein function
| Gene | Protein function | Significance in virulence | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| aipA | Hemagglutinin | Host cell invasion | (194) |
| hpmA | Hemolysin | Hemolytic and cytotoxic activity | (102, 115, 195) |
| mrpA | Major MR/P fimbria protein | Fimbria involved in swarming, biofilm formation, and adhesion to host cells | (106, 183, 184, 196, 197) |
| nrpR | Siderophore synthase | Siderophore synthase, iron acquisition | (198) |
| pmfA | Major fimbrial subunit | Fimbria involved in swarming and adhesion to host cells | (188, 189, 196) |
| Pta | Autotransporter | Surface-associated cytotoxin | (115) |
| taaP | Adhesin | Promotes auto-agglutination | (194) |
| ureC | Urease subunit | Nitrogen and carbon acquisition, pH increase leading to optimal pH in urine and stone formation | (59, 106, 199) |
| zapA | Serralysin | Degrades host immunoglobulins, but also cell matrix and cytoskeletal proteins, and antimicrobial peptides | (200) |
After initial adhesion, often to catheters in the case of P. mirabilis, biofilm formation can be initiated. Biofilms are characterized by the presence of bacterial cells in extrapolymeric substances and have been implicated as providing protection against both physical forces and biological factors, such as the treatment with antibiotic compounds (201–205), making biofilm infections especially challenging to treat (206).
Therapeutic approaches to swarming and biofilm formation
A specific challenge in preventing and treating Proteus infections is posed by the ability of Proteus spp. to swarm and ascend on catheters into the urinary tract, as well as adhere to them and form biofilms. Consequently, there have been numerous efforts to design catheters that are inhibitory to biofilm formation. Each of these efforts comes with its own chances and risks, and as of now, none of the solutions has led to the development of a commonly applicable solution for the medical field (207). Possible ideas are catheter coatings that could contain either antimicrobial substances, biofilm inhibitors, bacteriophages, or iron scavengers (58, 207–212). With catheter coatings, the release of substances plays a vital role in the viability of applications in clinical routine, as often the substances are depleted far earlier than the catheter would routinely be changed (213). A solution for this would be contact killing or rather non-release-based approaches, where the antimicrobial compound is covalently anchored to the catheter surface (214). Moreover, alternatives to the common Foley catheter are explored (215–218), as well as sensors that can be integrated into the catheter and detect the formation of crystalline biofilm by measuring pH (219, 220). Recently, a polymer resistant to bacterial biofilm, swarming, and encrustation was discovered and tested with P. mirabilis. Further tests with this polymer will be of special interest in the development of a novel catheter designed to prevent swarming and biofilm formation (221).
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued guidelines for the prevention of CAUTIs in 2009, which were updated in 2017 (222). Here, the focus is on appropriate catheter use, proper insertion techniques, and proper maintenance. If the implementation of these guidelines does not lead to a decrease in CAUTIs, the use of a different catheter material is encouraged. Moreover, surveillance of CAUTI prevalence is recommended.
A problem in connection with biofilm and aggregate formation is the decreased susceptibility to antibiotics of cells within these structures (223). A study by Irwin et al. (224) determined the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) for planktonic bacteria and the minimum biofilm eradication concentration (MBEC) for the same bacteria in biofilm. Depending on the antibiotic, MIC and MBEC for P. mirabilis differed drastically, e.g., the MIC for ciprofloxacin was 0.08 mg/L at pH 7, whereas the MBEC was >125 µg/mL. It is important to note that the ability of bacterial cells in biofilms to tolerate higher concentrations of antimicrobial agents does not represent resistance (225) but is attributed to multiple factors, such as limited penetration of the antibiotics (226, 227), restricted growth of cells in the inner layers of the biofilm (226, 228, 229), the presence of persister cells (230–232), and more. Treatment options include topical administration of antimicrobials, the combination of antimicrobial therapies, and the use of adjuvants to increase the antimicrobial effect.
Topical administration of antibiotics in high concentration results in a high local concentration of the administered agent, while concentrations in other parts of the body are decreased (206, 233). This results in both a chance to treat biofilm-incorporated cells and a decreased overall chance of developing antimicrobial resistance (234, 235). Combining antimicrobial agents for treatments, either simultaneously or sequentially, can be used to delay the development of antimicrobial resistance and can help combat different subpopulations in the biofilm more efficiently (236–241). An example of a combination therapy tested in vitro on P. mirabilis planktonic and biofilm cells is the combination of a lytic bacteriophage and ampicillin (242). In the study performed by Yazdi et al. (242) in 2018, a bacteriophage with high lytic activity against some P. mirabilis strains (and no activity to the tested K. pneumoniae and E. coli strains) was used. The combination of ampicillin and bacteriophage treatment showed a higher impact on the population density of planktonic P. mirabilis strains than both treatments alone. More importantly, after combination treatment of P. mirabilis biofilm, 93% of biofilm was removed compared to the control treatment, followed by 70% biofilm removal by the phage alone and 44% by ampicillin (at a concentration of 246 µg/mL) alone.
Proteus urease
The production of urease, an enzyme catalyzing the hydrolysis of urea into carbon dioxide and ammonia, has a significant impact on the pathogenesis of Proteus infections (243). The reaction leads to both an increase in utilizable nitrogen supply with the increase of ammonia and an increase in pH in the environment. While Proteus spp. can withstand pH ranges from pH 5–10, their optimal pH ranges from 7 to 8, a condition usually not met in the slightly acidic urine with a median pH of around 6 (41, 244). Thus, by producing urease, Proteus spp. get access to ammonia as a nitrogen source, as well as optimize their growth conditions by adjusting pH. The increase in pH, as discussed above, not only promotes the growth of Proteus spp. but also the formation of stones, as it initially leads to the precipitation of magnesium and calcium minerals. The resulting urinary stones can obstruct the urinary flow and lead to tissue damage (117). Moreover, catheters can be obstructed, and the formation of crystalline biofilm sheltering the bacteria is facilitated (Fig. 4). Urease-negative P. mirabilis strains have been demonstrated to lack the ability to induce stone formation (243). Urease activity has been identified in P. mirabilis, P. penneri, P. vulgaris, and P. columbae (72, 245, 246). While it is highly likely that urease is also active in other Proteus reference strains, no published research has yet confirmed this.
Fig 4.
Sections of an encrusted pigtail catheter colonized by P. mirabilis and E. coli. (A) Overview picture of a catheter’s side hole with encrustations, magnified in (B). (C) Catheter in cross-section. The lumen diameter is significantly decreased, leading to obstruction of urinary flow.
How to manage urease production?
Since urease production and the subsequent pH increase enhance Proteus spp. and other urease-producing bacteria’s ability to thrive in the urinary tract, as well as ultimately induce stone formation, the application of urease inhibitors appears to be an important component in fighting Proteus UTIs (247). One kind of urease inhibitor is quinolones. The two fluoroquinolone antibiotics levofloxacin and ciprofloxacin have been shown to exhibit antibacterial activity against P. mirabilis and to inhibit urease activity (248). Moxifloxacin also inhibits urease activity, with inhibition activity being even larger when combined with silver in an Ag-Mox nanoparticle (249).
Natural products such as cranberry juice have been used to prevent and treat UTIs—or support other therapeutic agents—for a long time. The presence of flavonoids acting as urease inhibitors is considered to be the reason for this treatment (250). While there is an ongoing debate on the effectiveness of cranberry products on the prevention and treatment of UTIs (251), further in vitro data on the activity of other flavonoids are promising. In a study using Helicobacter pylori urease, quercetin, a flavonoid present in capers, coriander, and kale (252), was a strong urease inhibitor (253). There are many more components exhibiting urease-inhibiting activity (254), including natural products such as boswellic acid and palmatine (255, 256), heterocyclic compounds (257), and covalently binding inhibitors such as disulfiram (258).
Proteus-specific urease inhibitors have been described by Milo et al. (259), who report on 2-mercaptoacetamide, a small molecular enzyme inhibitor able to inhibit P. mirabilis urease, as well as preventing catheter encrustation in an in vitro bladder model. Grela et al. (260) have tested 21 compounds for P. mirabilis urease-inhibiting activity. Of these 21 compounds, 18 have shown inhibitory qualities, making the implementation of urease inhibitors a potentially new route in combating Proteus UTIs. To date, two urease inhibitors have been approved by the FDA, namely acetohydroxamic acid (Lithostat) and hydroxycarbamide/hydroxyurea (261, 262), which both have significant side effects (263), making routine application not feasible.
Immune evasion
Proteus spp. have several ways to evade the host immune response, ranging from the invasion of host cells to the production of antimicrobial-degrading peptides and LPS modification. The innate immune response to UTIs with P. mirabilis is a proinflammatory response. Studies in mice have shown elevated levels of CXCL1 and interleukin-10 (114). CXCL1 is a known neutrophil chemoattractant, resulting in the recruitment of neutrophils to the region of infection. Formation of P. mirabilis clusters in the bladder lumen further elicits a recruitment of neutrophils (106). Neutrophils can clear bacteria by mediating phagocytosis or NETosis, a process where neutrophil extracellular traps, consisting of condensed chromatin and antimicrobial proteins, are released (264, 265). However, it is generally assumed that the formation of big clusters, as well as the embedment in urinary stones, can protect Proteus cells (106, 117).
P. mirabilis cells are able to both invade and lyse host cells. Contrary to E. coli, however, they do not form large intracellular niches but appear to use invasion as a way to evade the host’s immune response and initially establish a small intercellular population, then return to the bladder lumen. Factors responsible for invasion and lysis are the AipA autotransporter for bladder cell invasion, as well as the Proteus toxic agglutinin (Pta) and hemolysin (HpmA) for lysis (115, 194). P. mirabilis has been found to be resistant to killing by polymyxins, polycationic antimicrobial peptides, as well as other antimicrobial peptides (266). This resistance is mediated by modifications of the LPS, the initial targets of polymyxins, altering the surface charges, and the production of Zap protease, a toxin able to degrade antimicrobial peptides (267), as well as secretory IgA and IgG (200, 268). Moreover, P. mirabilis periplasmic proteinaceous inhibitor PliC is able to inhibit c-type lysozymes (269), another part of the human innate immune system (270).
There have been several efforts to aid the immune system in combating Proteus infections by vaccination (271–274). Choubini et al. (275) developed a vaccine based on MrpA, UcaA, and Pta antigens, targeting the major MR/P fimbria protein involved in biofilm formation, the adhesion pilin UcaA, and an autotransporter. Treatment of mice with the resulting vaccine significantly decreased the infection success of P. mirabilis in a murine experimental UTI challenge. In another study performed by Habibi et al. (276), a vaccine was designed based on P. mirabilis MrpA and Flagellin (FliC). Vaccinated mice were challenged with P. mirabilis HI3240, and the colony count in bladders and kidneys was determined. The fusion vaccine MrpA.FliC was most effective in preventing infection, reducing the median colony count in the bladder 14,950-fold and in the kidney 6,429-fold compared to the control. While efforts to develop an applicable vaccine for clinical use are ongoing, no such vaccine is available to date.
Toxins
The main toxins in P. mirabilis associated with virulence are hemolysins, agglutinins, and metalloproteases. Hemolysins are secreted pore-forming cytotoxins. The predominant hemolysin in the Proteus genus is HpmA, which, together with HpmB, constitutes a two-partner (or Type Vb), Sec-dependent secretion system, encoded by the genes hpmA and hpmB (277). HpmB forms a β-barrel transmembrane channel for extracellular secretion of HpmA from the periplasm after N-terminal proteolytic processing (278). HpmA is capable of lysing several types of cells from several host species and has been reported in P. mirabilis, P. vulgaris, and P. penneri (105, 195, 279–281). To date, however, deletion of hpmA has not been found to significantly affect the virulence of P. mirabilis, most likely because it is masked by other factors (102, 115, 187, 195, 282–284). Pta, the Proteus toxic agglutinin, is a protein found in the outer membrane that is described as both an agglutinin and a cytotoxin (285). Pta has been shown to lyse bladder cells in vitro and contribute to the colonization of bladder and kidney in a murine co-challenge experiment (285). ZapA is a metalloprotease with a relatively broad specificity, capable of cleaving IgA, IgG, antimicrobial peptides, actin, collagen, and more (268, 286–289). Due to its broad specificity, its presence contributes strongly to virulence (200).
Virulence of species other than P. mirabilis
Since P. mirabilis is the most common Proteus spp. encountered in the healthcare setting, and most research has been performed on this species, little is known about the virulence of other Proteus spp. While P. vulgaris, P. penneri, P. hauseri, and P. appendicitidis have been associated with human infections, there is very little evidence for the other Proteus spp. Virulence can be assessed in numerous ways, including animal models (290, 291), comparative genomics (292, 293), transcriptomics (294, 295), and (genome-wide) mutagenesis (296–298). Recent advances in microfluidics even permit experiments in bladder models outside of test animals (299). For this review, we assessed if known virulence genes of P. mirabilis were also present in the genomes of other Proteus spp. BLAST (300) was used to search for the amino acid sequence of proteins described in highly virulent P. mirabilis HI4320 in the translated whole-genome assemblies of the type strains for P. penneri (ASM314453v1, GCF_003144535.1), P. vulgaris (PVA, GCF_000754995.1), P. terrae subsp. terrae (ASM314432v1, GCF_003144325.1), and P. terrae subsp. cibarius (ASM314449v1, GCF_003144495.1) (Fig. 5). This analysis can only give a brief insight into the presence of genes coding for certain virulence proteins in the Proteus type strains, and a more in-depth analysis is necessary to confirm conservation of these proteins between species. It appeared that a variant of all eight assessed virulence genes was present in the respective Proteus spp.
Fig 5.
Heatmap of genes associated with virulence in P. mirabilis uropathogenic strain HI4320 compared to a selection of type strains of other Proteus species.
Urease, the protein responsible for hydrolyzing urea and thus ultimately nitrogen acquisition, is present in all tested Proteus spp. with high protein similarity (Fig. 5). This is most likely due to the fact that urea is present abundantly in both humans and animals, thus presenting an attractive source of nitrogen and carbon. In the clinical context, the presence of urease in all tested Proteus spp. could be an indication of their ability to colonize the human host, specifically the bladder, once introduced to the system. MrpA, the major MR/P fimbriae protein, is involved in swarming, biofilm formation, and adhesion to host cells and thus crucial to virulence. Notably, P. terrae subsp. terrae possesses the protein with the highest protein similarity to P. mirabilis uropathogenic strain HI4320, indicating it to be a strong candidate for human colonization and infection. PmfA, the major fimbrial subunit involved in swarming and adhesion to host cells, is conserved in all tested Proteus spp. The same does not hold true for serralysin ZapA and the autotransporter Pta. ZapA plays an important role in the immune evasion of Proteus infections, as it is able to degrade—among others—antimicrobial peptides. NrpR, involved in siderophore synthase, and TaaP, an adhesin involved in auto-agglutination, are only weakly conserved in Proteus spp. compared to Proteus mirabilis HI4320. This might be explained by the preferred niche of the species. While P. mirabilis is commonly found in the bladder, which is an iron-limited environment, little is known about the natural environments of other Proteus species. It is possible that in these environments, highly effective iron-scavenging enzymes are not necessary for survival. HpmA, a hemolysin, is also present in all tested Proteus spp. and moderately conserved, again hinting at the possibility of human infection through representatives of other Proteus spp.
Prediction of pathogenicity of Proteus type strains using PathogenFinder (301) yields a positive result for all Proteus spp. type strains known to date. Interestingly, the species P. terrae subsp. cibarius is predicted to be a human pathogen with a higher probability (P = 0.871) than the documented human pathogen P. mirabilis (P = 0.784). A first clinically relevant P. terrae subsp. cibarius isolate has been described in 2018, originating from a human wound sample in Nigeria (302).
Antimicrobial resistance
A prevalent problem when dealing with Proteus spp. is their ability to acquire antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs). While P. mirabilis wild type is naturally susceptible to almost all beta-lactams (Table 2), more and more strains with acquired beta-lactamases have been reported. In a recent study from Egypt (303), 51.7% of P. mirabilis clinical isolates produced extended-spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBLs), while 10.3% were carbapenemase producers. Of 58 strains, 17 (29.3%) were considered multidrug-resistant (MDR), making them complicated to treat. In another study from Italy (8) investigating bloodstream infections caused by P. mirabilis, 44% of the cases were caused by ESBL-producing P. mirabilis. A large-scale study (304) investigating a total of 1,406 P. mirabilis isolates collected from multiple sites around the world, including Latin America, North America, and Europe, reported the highest prevalence of ESBL-producing P. mirabilis among all isolates in Latin America (22.4%), followed by Europe (11.1%). Percentages were much lower in Canada, the United States, and the Western Pacific (3.1%, 4.9%, and 1.8%, respectively).
TABLE 2.
Expected phenotypes of different Proteus spp. according to EUCASTb
| P. mirabilis | P. penneri | P. vulgaris | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ampicillin/amoxicillin | S | R | R |
| Amoxicillin-clavulanate | S | S | S |
| Ampicillin-sulbactam | S | S | S |
| Ticarcillin | S | S | S |
| Cefazolin, cefalexin | S | R | R |
| Cefoxitin | S | S | S |
| Cefuroxime | Ia | R | R |
| Tetracyclines | R | R | R |
| Polymyxin B, colistin | R | R | R |
| Nitrofurantoin | R | R | R |
Conjugation plays a key role in the acquisition of ARGs in Proteus spp. (307) and is the most effective mechanism of horizontal gene transfer (307, 308). It allows rapid spread of ARGs and can confer MDR in a single conjugation event (309, 310). Conjugative plasmids can contain multiple ARGs (311) and either stay as plasmids in the recipient cell for further conjugation events or integrate into the host’s chromosome if they contain transposons (312) or integrons (313). These genetic elements encode for integrase or transposase enzymes, which can incorporate the ARGs into the chromosome. The spread of MDR is often facilitated by gene cassettes containing multiple ARGs, which can be incorporated into the chromosome in a single step (314). Conjugation has been extensively studied in Proteus spp. for many years. Multiple studies have demonstrated that most resistance genes were found on conjugative plasmids and integrons (307, 308, 315).
Proteus spp. can exchange ARGs via conjugation intraspecies and interspecies. Among the Enterobacteriaceae family, conjugation events are common (316, 317). For example, E. coli has been identified as both a donor and receiver of ARGs (318–320), as well as K. pneumoniae (321), and Salmonella spp. (322). They have been shown to exchange plasmids containing ESBLs (323, 324), fluoroquinolone resistance genes (325, 326), aminoglycoside-modifying enzymes (327), as well as carbapenemase genes (328). Conjugative plasmids encoding genes that confer resistance to diverse beta-lactams (329–331), tetracyclines (332), sulfonamides (333), and aminoglycosides (331) were also identified in P. mirabilis.
Carbapenemases in Proteus spp.
Of increasing global importance is the rapid spread of carbapenemase genes as carbapenems are used as “last resort” antibiotics in many countries for the treatment of ESBL-producing Enterobacterales (334). Carbapenem resistance in P. mirabilis poses a particularly dangerous global health issue as it frequently results in pandrug-resistant isolates (335). This is caused by the intrinsic resistance of P. mirabilis against polymyxins (336), which are other “last resort” antibiotics that previously showed an effect against many carbapenemase producers (337). Three classes of carbapenemases have been identified in Proteus spp.: Ambler classes A, B, and D beta-lactamases (338–340) (Table 3). Of class A carbapenemases, KPC-2 is the most common one among Enterobacterales worldwide (341). It was initially identified in K. pneumoniae (321). KPC enzymes confer resistance to different classes of beta-lactams, including carbapenems and cephalosporins (342, 343). They are usually encoded on a conjugative plasmid with a transposon (341, 344, 345).
TABLE 3.
First discoveries of carbapenemases in Proteus spp.
| Carbapenemase | First discovered in Proteus spp. | Reference |
|---|---|---|
| OXA-23 | 1996–1999, France | (346) |
| VIM-1 | 2006, Greece | (347) |
| KPC-2 | 2008, USA | (338) |
| IMP-27 | 2009, USA | (348) |
| NDM-1 | 2009-2010, Switzerland | (349) |
| OXA-48 | 2012, Palestine | (340) |
| OXA-58 | 2017, Belgium | (350) |
| OXA-24/40 | 2019, Algeria | (351) |
| OXA-162 | 2023, Germany | (352) |
| OXA-181 | 2023, Germany | (352) |
In contrast to Ambler class A, C, and D enzymes, which are serine-beta-lactamases, class B enzymes are metallo-beta-lactamases with zinc ions in their active sites. This makes them susceptible to inhibition by cation chelators like EDTA, but not by regularly used beta-lactamase inhibitors (353). A widespread member of this class, IMP-1, which was originally identified in P. aeruginosa, is able to hydrolyze imipenem, penicillins, and extended-spectrum cephalosporins but not aztreonam (354). Cefiderocol is a novel siderophore cephalosporin that was shown to have high stability against clinically relevant carbapenemases like IMP-1, KPC-3, and NDM-1 and is efficiently taken up by bacterial cells (355).
Class D beta-lactamases include oxacillin-hydrolyzing enzymes called OXAs (356, 357). The class is further divided into multiple subfamilies with some possessing carbapenem-hydrolyzing activities (358). Their abundances differ between continents and the species of Enterobacterales. In contrast to other members of the order, the most prevalent OXA-type carbapenemases in Proteus spp. seem to be OXA-23, OXA-48, and OXA-58 (359–361). A recent study investigating isolates from France and Belgium found that among 61 isolates with an OXA-type phenotype, 21 isolates produced OXA-23 (359). While OXA-58 is commonly found in Acinetobacter spp., a study in Germany found that only 4 out of 37 strains of P. mirabilis isolated from different patients produced OXA-58 (361). The same study stated that the presence of OXA-58 may easily be missed in P. mirabilis as its detection with MIC and CarbaNP tests is difficult. The detection of OXA-48 in P. mirabilis poses a similar problem. It was previously rarely identified in this organism (362). A recent study in Germany found that, similar to OXA-58, OXA-48-producing P. mirabilis isolates exhibited low MIC values for carbapenems. Additionally, in contrast to other carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales, MIC values for piperacillin-tazobactam were also low (363). Even though MIC testing implied that OXA-48 only confers resistance against low concentrations of carbapenems in P. mirabilis, another study showed that carbapenems are, in fact, not an effective treatment against OXA-48-producing Enterobacterales (364).
The effective treatment of resistant Proteus infections depends on the prompt detection of the particular strain’s resistance mechanisms and the resulting appropriate antibiotic therapy. However, for P. mirabilis, it has been noted that standard testing procedures such as determination of the MIC or disk-diffusion tests with current breakpoints lack sensitivity to reliably detect carbapenemase production in P. mirabilis isolates producing OXA-23, OXA-48-like, and OXA-58 (352). Additionally, the detection of carbapenemases by other methods is also more challenging compared to other Enterobacterales. Immunochromatographic tests are now often employed for the detection of carbapenemases in clinical routine diagnostics but have been shown to fail more often in Proteus spp. compared to other species (365–368), potentially related to lower expression of the carbapenemase enzyme. Similarly, detection of carbapenemase genes may fail since many commercial assays target only the major genes found in Enterobacteriaceae (blaKPC, blaNDM, blaVIM, blaOXA-48-like, and blaIMP) but do not include blaOXA-23 and blaOXA-58 (352, 369).
Thus, special care is recommended when treating P. mirabilis infections to prevent inappropriate and ineffective therapy. Recently, a simple algorithm for the phenotypic detection of carbapenemase production in P. mirabilis has been proposed. By combining disk diffusion tests using temocillin and ticarcillin-clavulanate with mzCIM, 100% specificity and sensitivity were obtained both in a retrospective and a prospective analysis of 81 and 91 strains, respectively (352).
POTENTIAL OF PROTEUS SPP. IN MEDICINE AND BIOTECHNOLOGY
Despite Proteus spp. prevalence and persistence in infections, Proteus spp. also offer several chances for applications in the medical fields and biotechnology for the future. Proteus spp. have been found in a number of extreme environments, having adapted to these environments by the use of surprising metabolic features. A number of strains have been reported to withstand higher than usual concentrations of toxic compounds, such as copper and other heavy metals (370–372), high salinity (373), and high acidity (374).
Of special interest to medicine and biotechnology are species that are not only able to withstand extreme conditions but also able to utilize compounds that are either toxic or non-degradable. One of these compounds is oil, which is often released into the environment on accident, with remediation proving very difficult. Kim et al. (375) published the finding of a P. vulgaris strain expressing an extracellular alkaline lipase as early as 1995. Whangsuk et al. (376) found another Proteus sp. strain able to convert palm oil into biodiesel, whereas Ibrahim et al. identified a P. vulgaris and a P. mirabilis strain as two of the most active crude oil degraders in a tested set of strains (377). P. mirabilis has been successfully used to degrade hydrocarbons in oil sludge, and there are plans for in situ application of said strain, possibly bioremediating oil spills or other polluted sites (378).
Certain strains of Proteus spp. have also been found to be capable of phenol utilization (379), DDT reduction (380), pesticide degradation (381–383), and azo dye neutralization (384, 385). Taken together, Proteus spp. appear to be particularly well suited for adapting to extreme lifestyles and might thus be of great importance in developing strategies to neutralize toxic compounds in contaminated soil and wastewater. Moreover, with their high resistance to heavy metals, Proteus spp. have been implicated in aiding plant growth in contaminated soil regions. One P. mirabilis strain was reported to effectively block zinc from being taken up by maize roots, reducing the plant’s oxidative stress and thus promoting its growth (386). In addition to this, some Proteus strains reportedly solubilize phosphate, which again promotes plant growth (387).
CONCLUSION
The Proteus genus contains pathogenic species with a high diversity that has only been uncovered recently. While most of the clinical research has been focused on P. mirabilis and its ability to swarm and produce urease, leading to complications in infections such as UTIs, little is known about the other members of the Proteus genus. Here, we show that infection with all Proteus spp. appears to be possible, as many virulence genes are shared. Experimental confirmation of this is needed to assess the risk and severity of infections.
Proteus spp. are highly relevant in the context of AMR dissemination, as they are able to acquire AMR genes, and the presence of some of these genes is not always detected by standard assays. This can result in prolonged infections and thus the opportunity for AMR genes to be transferred to other pathogens. Further investigation into accurate testing for the presence of AMR genes in Proteus spp. is necessary to effectively prevent further spread of AMR.
However, the high diversity and adaptability of Proteus spp. also appear to be beneficial, as there have been several strains of Proteus spp. reported to degrade or utilize toxic compounds. Using Proteus spp. in directed evolution approaches could lead to novel ways to efficiently degrade toxic compounds both in the lab and in remediation projects.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank Lukas Schaffarczyk for assistance with photography and Uwe Söchting and Alexander Winter for providing urinary tract catheters.
This study was financed by internal funding.
Biographies

Linea Katharina Muhsal, PhD, is advancing the fields of medical microbiology and microbial ecology as a postdoctoral researcher at Germany's Osnabrück University and guest scientist at Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg. Her academic journey began with a Bachelor of Science in Biology from the University of Bielefeld, Germany, followed by a Master of Science in Biotechnology from the Wageningen University and Research Center in the Netherlands. At the University of Osnabrück, she earned her doctorate studying bacterial ecology and evolution, where she combined laboratory experimentation with modeling techniques to investigate the evolution of cooperative behavior in bacteria. In 2024, Dr. Muhsal broadened her research to include medical research with a PostDoc at Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg, focusing on P. mirabilis and carbapenemase detection. Her current work bridges microbiology and technology, exploring machine learning applications for antimicrobial resistance detection while maintaining her core focus on microbial ecology and evolution — specifically how environmental factors influence species and community behavior in both natural and medical contexts

Lisa Theis, B.Sc., is currently completing her Master´s thesis at the Institute for Medical Microbiology and Virology at the Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg, Germany. In May 2024, she joined Professor Hamprecht’s research group, where she investigates natural competence in Gram-negative bacteria. She earned her Bachelor´s degree in Biology with specialization on Microbiology at the Philipps University of Marburg in Germany in cooperation with the Max-Planck-Institute for Terrestrial Microbiology. She has been pursuing her Master´s in Microbiology since 2022 in an international Master´s program coordinated by the Institute for the Chemistry and Biology of the Oceans (ICBM).

Jörg Overmann, PhD, serves as Scientific Director of the Leibniz Institute DSMZ-German Collection of Microorganisms and Cell Cultures since 2010 and is Professor of Microbiology at the Technical University of Braunschweig. He studied Biology with a focus on Microbiology at the Universities of Bochum and Freiburg, completing his doctorate at the University of Konstanz in 1991. Following postdoctoral research in Vancouver, Canada, and his habilitation at Carl von Ossietzky University Oldenburg, he became Professor of Microbiology at Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich before moving to Braunschweig. His research focuses on bacterial genome evolution, the diversity and functions of bacterial communities in natural environments, and on molecular mechanisms of bacterial interactions, including microbiomes. Dr. Overmann developed the bacterial metadata platform BacDive and has conducted extensive field research across Africa and South America. He served and serves on several prestigious committees, including the DFG Senate Commission on Biological Diversity and the Council of Scientists of the Human Frontier Science Program Organization. He is member of the Executive Committee of the Leibniz Association.

Axel Hamprecht is a professor of medical microbiology and virology of the Carl von Ossietzky University Oldenburg with a long-standing focus on antimicrobial resistance. He serves as the director of the Institute of Medical Microbiology and Virology at Oldenburg Hospital. Previously he worked as professor for multidrug-resistant pathogens at the University Hospital Cologne. Axel studied medicine at the Universities of Heidelberg, Bordeaux, Geneva, Nottingham and Berlin. He has always been fascinated by Gram-negative bacteria and their great arsenal of resistance mechanisms, a topic he has been working on for more than 10 years. His reseach focus is on carbapenemases in Enterobacterales and horizontal gene transfer. Additionally, he is interested in medically relevant fungi and improvement of diagnostic methods in microbiology.
Footnotes
Clinical Microbiology Reviews acknowledges the input of its peer reviewers, who may individually opt for their names to be included in the details for this article or otherwise remain anonymous.
Contributor Information
Axel Hamprecht, Email: axel.hamprecht@uol.de.
Jose M. Munita, Universidad del Desarrollo Facultad de Medicina, Santiago, Chile
REFERENCES
- 1. Grimont F, Grimont PA. 2006. The genus Enterobacter, p 197–214. In Dworkin M, Falkow S, Rosenberg E, Schleifer KH, Stackebrandt E (ed), Prokaryotes. Vol. 6. Springer, New York, NY. [Google Scholar]
- 2. Parte AC, Sardà Carbasse J, Meier-Kolthoff JP, Reimer LC, Göker M. 2020. List of prokaryotic names with standing in nomenclature (LPSN) moves to the DSMZ. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 70:5607–5612. doi: 10.1099/ijsem.0.004332 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Yong W, Xiaoling P. 2014. Bacteria: Proteus, p 486–489. In Yasmine M (ed), Encyclopedia of Food Safety. Academic Press, Waltham. [Google Scholar]
- 4. Allison C, Lai HC, Hughes C. 1992. Co-ordinate expression of virulence genes during swarm-cell differentiation and population migration of Proteus mirabilis. Mol Microbiol 6:1583–1591. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2958.1992.tb00883.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Mobley HL, Warren JW. 1987. Urease-positive bacteriuria and obstruction of long-term urinary catheters. J Clin Microbiol 25:2216–2217. doi: 10.1128/jcm.25.11.2216-2217.1987 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Breitenbucher RB. 1984. Bacterial changes in the urine samples of patients with long-term indwelling catheters. Arch Intern Med 144:1585–1588. doi: 10.1001/archinte.1984.00350200077013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Tumbarello M, Trecarichi EM, Fiori B, Losito AR, D’Inzeo T, Campana L, Ruggeri A, Di Meco E, Liberto E, Fadda G, Cauda R, Spanu T. 2012. Multidrug-resistant Proteus mirabilis bloodstream infections: risk factors and outcomes. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 56:3224–3231. doi: 10.1128/AAC.05966-11 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. Endimiani A, Luzzaro F, Brigante G, Perilli M, Lombardi G, Amicosante G, Rossolini GM, Toniolo A. 2005. Proteus mirabilis bloodstream infections: risk factors and treatment outcome related to the expression of extended-spectrum β-lactamases . Antimicrob Agents Chemother 49:2598–2605. doi: 10.1128/AAC.49.7.2598-2605.2005 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Chen C-Y, Chen Y-H, Lu P-L, Lin W-R, Chen T-C, Lin C-Y. 2012. Proteus mirabilis urinary tract infection and bacteremia: Risk factors, clinical presentation, and outcomes. Journal of Microbiology, Immunology and Infection 45:228–236. doi: 10.1016/j.jmii.2011.11.007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Korytny A, Riesenberg K, Saidel-Odes L, Schlaeffer F, Borer A. 2016. Bloodstream infections caused by multi-drug resistant Proteus mirabilis: epidemiology, risk factors and impact of multi-drug resistance. Infect Dis (Lond) 48:428–431. doi: 10.3109/23744235.2015.1129551 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Warren JW, Tenney JH, Hoopes JM, Muncie HL, Anthony WC. 1982. A prospective microbiologic study of bacteriuria in patients with chronic indwelling urethral catheters. J Infect Dis 146:719–723. doi: 10.1093/infdis/146.6.719 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Bittar F, Keita MB, Lagier JC, Peeters M, Delaporte E, Raoult D. 2014. Gorilla gorilla gorilla gut: a potential reservoir of pathogenic bacteria as revealed using culturomics and molecular tools. Sci Rep 4:7174. doi: 10.1038/srep07174 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Gupta AK, Nayduch D, Verma P, Shah B, Ghate HV, Patole MS, Shouche YS. 2012. Phylogenetic characterization of bacteria in the gut of house flies (Musca domestica L.). FEMS Microbiol Ecol 79:581–593. doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6941.2011.01248.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Foti M, Rinaldo D, Guercio A, Giacopello C, Aleo A, De Leo F, Fisichella V, Mammina C. 2011. Pathogenic microorganisms carried by migratory birds passing through the territory of the island of Ustica, Sicily (Italy). Avian Pathol 40:405–409. doi: 10.1080/03079457.2011.588940 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Urban JE, Broce A. 1998. Flies and their bacterial loads in greyhound dog kennels in Kansas. Curr Microbiol 36:164–170. doi: 10.1007/pl00006761 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Vazirianzadeh B, Dehghani R, Mehdinejad M, Sharififard M, Nasirabadi N. 2014. The first report of drug resistant bacteria isolated from the brown-banded cockroach, Supella longipalpa, in Ahvaz, South-western Iran. J Arthropod Borne Dis 8:53–59. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Usman S, Yakasai HM, Shukor MY. 2022. Growth optimization of naphthalene-degrading Proteus vulgari s isolated from oil-spill contaminated soil at NNPC depot in northern Nigeria. J Mater Environ Sci 13:502–514. [Google Scholar]
- 18. Behrendt U, Augustin J, Spröer C, Gelbrecht J, Schumann P, Ulrich A. 2015. Taxonomic characterisation of Proteus terrae sp. nov., a N2O-producing, nitrate-ammonifying soil bacterium. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 108:1457–1468. doi: 10.1007/s10482-015-0601-5 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19. Ajayi-Odoko AO, Ayansina ADV, Ikhimiukor OO, Müller JA, Adelowo OO. 2023. Proteus mirabilis isolated from untreated hospital wastewater, Ibadan, Southwestern Nigeria showed low-level resistance to fluoroquinolone and carried qnrD3 on Col3M plasmids. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 30:47158–47167. doi: 10.1007/s11356-023-25618-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Miryala SK, Anbarasu A, Ramaiah S. 2021. Gene interaction network approach to elucidate the multidrug resistance mechanisms in the pathogenic bacterial strain Proteus mirabilis. J Cell Physiol 236:468–479. doi: 10.1002/jcp.29874 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21. Liu L, Dong Z, Ai S, Chen S, Dong M, Li Q, Zhou Z, Liu H, Zhong Z, Ma X, Hu Y, Ren Z, Fu H, Shu G, Qiu X, Peng G. 2023. Virulence-related factors and antimicrobial resistance in Proteus mirabilis isolated from domestic and stray dogs. Front Microbiol 14:1141418. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1141418 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Guo S, Aung KT, Tay MYF, Seow KLG, Ng LC, Schlundt J. 2019. Extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Proteus mirabilis with multidrug resistance isolated from raw chicken in Singapore: genotypic and phenotypic analysis. J Glob Antimicrob Resist 19:252–254. doi: 10.1016/j.jgar.2019.10.013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. Jee Y, Carlson J, Rafai E, Musonda K, Huong TTG, Daza P, Sattayawuthipong W, Yoon T. 2018. Antimicrobial resistance: a threat to global health. Lancet Infect Dis 18:939–940. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(18)30471-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24. Inoue H. 2019. Strategic approach for combating antimicrobial resistance (AMR). GHM 1:61–64. doi: 10.35772/ghm.2019.01026 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25. Obayori OS, Salam LB, Oyetibo GO, Idowu M, Amund OO. 2017. Biodegradation potentials of polyaromatic hydrocarbon (pyrene and phenanthrene) by Proteus mirabilis isolated from an animal charcoal polluted site. Biocatalysis and Agricultural Biotechnology 12:78–84. doi: 10.1016/j.bcab.2017.09.003 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Khalilian M, Zolfaghari MR, Soleimani M. 2015. High potential application in bioremediation of selenate by Proteus hauseri strain QW4. Iran J Microbiol 7:94–102. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27. Ganorkar R, Jadeja NB, Shanware A, Ingle AB. 2022. Characterisation of novel microbial strains Proteus mirabilis and Bordetella avium for heavy metal bioremediation and dye degradation. Arch Microbiol 204:262. doi: 10.1007/s00203-022-02873-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28. Hauser G. 1885. Über Fäulnissbacterien und deren Beziehungen zur Septicämie: Ein Beitrag zur Morphologie der Spaltpilze. F.C.W. Vogel, Leipzig. [Google Scholar]
- 29. Hauser G. 1892. Ueber das Vorkommen von Proteus vulgaris bei einer jauchig-phlegmonösen eiterung nebst einigen bemerkungen zur biologie des Proteus Münch. Med. Wochenschr 39:103–105. [Google Scholar]
- 30. Cosenza BJ, Podgwaite JD. 1966. A new species of Proteus isolated from larvae of the gypsy moth Porthetria dispar (L.). Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 32:187–191. doi: 10.1007/BF02097459 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31. Giammanco GM, Grimont PAD, Grimont F, Lefevre M, Giammanco G, Pignato S. 2011. Phylogenetic analysis of the genera Proteus, Morganella and Providencia by comparison of rpoB gene sequences of type and clinical strains suggests the reclassification of Proteus myxofaciens in a new genus, Cosenzaea gen. nov., as Cosenzaea myxofaciens comb. nov. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 61:1638–1644. doi: 10.1099/ijs.0.021964-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32. Behrendt U, Wende S, Kolb S, Ulrich A. 2019. Genome-based phylogeny of the genera Proteus and Cosenzaea and description of Proteus terrae subsp. terrae subsp. nov. and Proteus terrae subsp. cibarius subsp. nov. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 71. doi: 10.1099/ijsem.0.004651 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33. Hickman FW, Steigerwalt AG, Farmer JJ 3rd, Brenner DJ. 1982. Identification of Proteus penneri sp. nov., formerly known as Proteus vulgaris indole negative or as Proteus vulgaris biogroup 1. J Clin Microbiol 15:1097–1102. doi: 10.1128/jcm.15.6.1097-1102.1982 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34. Brenner DJ, Farmer JJ, Fanning GR, Steigerwalt AG, Klykken P, Wathen HG, Hickman FW, Ewing WH. 1978. Deoxyribonucleic acid relatedness of Proteus and Providencia species. Int J Syst Bacteriol 28:269–282. doi: 10.1099/00207713-28-2-269 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 35. Brenner DJ, Hickman-brenner FW, Holmes B, Hawkey PM, Penner JL, Grimont PAD, O’hara CM. 1995. Replacement of NCTC 4175, the current type strain of Proteus vulgaris, with ATCC 29905: request for an opinion. Int J Syst Bacteriol 45:870–871. doi: 10.1099/00207713-45-4-870 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36. Trüper HG. 1999. Replacement of strain NCTC 4175, since 1963 the neotype strain of Proteus vulgaris, with strain ATCC 29905 – opinion 70. Int J Syst Bacteriol 49:1949–1949. doi: 10.1099/00207713-49-4-1949 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37. O’Hara CM, Brenner FW, Steigerwalt AG, Hill BC, Holmes B, Grimont PA, Hawkey PM, Penner JL, Miller JM, Brenner DJ. 2000. Classification of Proteus vulgaris biogroup 3 with recognition of Proteus hauseri sp. nov., nom. rev. and unnamed Proteus genomospecies 4, 5 and 6. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 50 Pt 5:1869–1875. doi: 10.1099/00207713-50-5-1869 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38. Hyun D-W, Jung M-J, Kim M-S, Shin N-R, Kim PS, Whon TW, Bae J-W. 2016. Proteus cibarius sp. nov., a swarming bacterium from Jeotgal, a traditional Korean fermented seafood, and emended description of the genus Proteus. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 66:2158–2164. doi: 10.1099/ijsem.0.001002 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39. Dai H, Lu B, Li Z, Huang Z, Cai H, Yu K, Wang D. 2020. Multilocus sequence analysis for the taxonomic updating and identification of the genus Proteus and reclassification of Proteus genospecies 5 O’Hara et al. 2000, Proteus cibarius Hyun et al. 2016 as later heterotypic synonyms of Proteus terrae Behrendt et al. 2015. BMC Microbiol 20:152. doi: 10.1186/s12866-020-01844-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40. Dai H, Wang Y, Fang Y, Xiao T, Huang Z, Kan B, Wang D. 2018. Proteus columbae sp. nov., isolated from a pigeon in Ma’anshan, China. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 68:552–557. doi: 10.1099/ijsem.0.002541 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41. Dai H, Chen A, Wang Y, Lu B, Wang Y, Chen J, Huang Y, Li Z, Fang Y, Xiao T, Cai H, Du Z, Wei Q, Kan B, Wang D. 2019. Proteus faecis sp. nov., and Proteus cibi sp. nov., two new species isolated from food and clinical samples in China. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 69:852–858. doi: 10.1099/ijsem.0.003248 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42. Dai H, Wang Y, Fang Y, Huang Z, Kan B, Wang D. 2018. Proteus alimentorum sp. nov., isolated from pork and lobster in Ma’anshan city, China. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 68:1390–1395. doi: 10.1099/ijsem.0.002689 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43. He J, Zhang Z, Qu H, Chen G, Zhou J, Zhou W, Peng Y, Cai X. 2024. Proteus appendicitidis sp. nov., isolated from the appendiceal pus of an appendicitis patient in Yongzhou, China. Arch Microbiol 206:171. doi: 10.1007/s00203-024-03887-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44. Meier-Kolthoff JP, Göker M. 2019. TYGS is an automated high-throughput platform for state-of-the-art genome-based taxonomy. Nat Commun 10:2182. doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-10210-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45. Letunic I, Bork P. 2024. Interactive Tree of Life (iTOL) v6: recent updates to the phylogenetic tree display and annotation tool. Nucleic Acids Res 52:W78–W82. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkae268 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46. Adeolu M, Alnajar S, Naushad S, S Gupta R. 2016. Genome-based phylogeny and taxonomy of the “Enterobacteriales”: proposal for Enterobacterales ord. nov. divided into the families Enterobacteriaceae, Erwiniaceae fam. nov., Pectobacteriaceae fam. nov., Yersiniaceae fam. nov., Hafniaceae fam. nov., Morganellaceae fam. nov., and Budviciaceae fam. nov. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 66:5575–5599. doi: 10.1099/ijsem.0.001485 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47. Sayers EW, Bolton EE, Brister JR, Canese K, Chan J, Comeau DC, Connor R, Funk K, Kelly C, Kim S, Madej T, Marchler-Bauer A, Lanczycki C, Lathrop S, Lu Z, Thibaud-Nissen F, Murphy T, Phan L, Skripchenko Y, Tse T, Wang J, Williams R, Trawick BW, Pruitt KD, Sherry ST. 2022. Database resources of the national center for biotechnology information. Nucleic Acids Res 50:D20–D26. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkab1112 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48. Yatsunenko T, Rey FE, Manary MJ, Trehan I, Dominguez-Bello MG, Contreras M, Magris M, Hidalgo G, Baldassano RN, Anokhin AP, Heath AC, Warner B, Reeder J, Kuczynski J, Caporaso JG, Lozupone CA, Lauber C, Clemente JC, Knights D, Knight R, Gordon JI. 2012. Human gut microbiome viewed across age and geography. Nature 486:222–227. doi: 10.1038/nature11053 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49. Potron A, Hocquet D, Triponney P, Plésiat P, Bertrand X, Valot B. 2019. Carbapenem-susceptible OXA-23-producing Proteus mirabilis in the French community. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 63. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00191-19 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50. Wang S, Zhang Y, Zhang X, Li J. 2020. An evaluation of multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria in patients with urinary stone disease: data from a high-volume stone management center. World J Urol 38:425–432. doi: 10.1007/s00345-019-02772-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51. Mordi RM, aI M. 2009. Incidence of Proteus species in wound infections and their sensitivity pattern in the University of Benin Teaching Hospital. African Journal of Biotechnology 8. doi: 10.5897/AJB2009.000-9123 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 52. Peerbooms PG, Verweij AM, MacLaren DM. 1985. Uropathogenic properties of Proteus mirabilis and Proteus vulgaris. J Med Microbiol 19:55–60. doi: 10.1099/00222615-19-1-55 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53. Mori N, Hirai J, Sakanashi D, Takayama M, Nakamura A, Ohta H, Asai N, Mikamo H. 2023. Complicated pyelonephritis caused by Proteus alimentorum in a woman with peritoneal cancer: a case report. BMC Infect Dis 23:328. doi: 10.1186/s12879-023-08296-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54. Flores-Mireles AL, Walker JN, Caparon M, Hultgren SJ. 2015. Urinary tract infections: epidemiology, mechanisms of infection and treatment options. Nat Rev Microbiol 13:269–284. doi: 10.1038/nrmicro3432 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55. Stewart S, Robertson C, Pan J, Kennedy S, Dancer S, Haahr L, Manoukian S, Mason H, Kavanagh K, Cook B, Reilly J. 2021. Epidemiology of healthcare-associated infection reported from a hospital-wide incidence study: considerations for infection prevention and control planning. Journal of Hospital Infection 114:10–22. doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2021.03.031 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56. Armbruster CE, Prenovost K, Mobley HLT, Mody L. 2017. How often do clinically diagnosed catheter‐associated urinary tract infections in nursing homes meet standardized criteria? J American Geriatrics Society 65:395–401. doi: 10.1111/jgs.14533 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57. Oumer Y, Regasa Dadi B, Seid M, Biresaw G, Manilal A. 2021. Catheter-associated urinary tract infection: incidence, associated factors and drug resistance patterns of bacterial isolates in Southern Ethiopia. Infect Drug Resist 14:2883–2894. doi: 10.2147/IDR.S311229 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58. Jacobsen SM, Stickler DJ, Mobley HLT, Shirtliff ME. 2008. Complicated catheter-associated urinary tract infections due to Escherichia coli and Proteus mirabilis. Clin Microbiol Rev 21:26–59. doi: 10.1128/CMR.00019-07 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59. Johnson DE, Russell RG, Lockatell CV, Zulty JC, Warren JW, Mobley HL. 1993. Contribution of Proteus mirabilis urease to persistence, urolithiasis, and acute pyelonephritis in a mouse model of ascending urinary tract infection. Infect Immun 61:2748–2754. doi: 10.1128/iai.61.7.2748-2754.1993 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60. Li L, Parwani AV. 2011. Xanthogranulomatous pyelonephritis. Arch Pathol Lab Med 135:671–674. doi: 10.5858/2009-0769-RSR.1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61. Phan V, Belas R, Gilmore BF, Ceri H. 2008. ZapA, a virulence factor in a rat model of Proteus mirabilis-induced acute and chronic prostatitis. Infect Immun 76:4859–4864. doi: 10.1128/IAI.00122-08 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62. Khan FU, Ihsan AU, Khan HU, Jana R, Wazir J, Khongorzul P, Waqar M, Zhou X. 2017. Comprehensive overview of prostatitis. Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy 94:1064–1076. doi: 10.1016/j.biopha.2017.08.016 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 63. Abbas HA, El-Saysed MA, Ganiny AM, Fattah AA. 2018. Antimicrobial resistance patterns of Proteus mirabilis isolates from urinary tract, burn wound and diabetic foot infections . Rese Jour of Pharm and Technol 11:249. doi: 10.5958/0974-360X.2018.00046.X [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 64. Watanakunakorn C, Perni SC. 1994. Proteus mirabilis bacteremia: a review of 176 cases during 1980-1992. Scand J Infect Dis 26:361–367. doi: 10.3109/00365549409008605 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65. Kim B-N, Kim NJ, Kim M-N, Kim YS, Woo J-H, Ryu J. 2003. Bacteraemia due to tribe Proteeae: a review of 132 cases during a decade (1991-2000). Scand J Infect Dis 35:98–103. doi: 10.1080/0036554021000027015 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 66. Schaffer JN, Pearson MM. 2017. Proteus mirabilis and urinary tract infections. In Urinary Tract Infections: Molecular Pathogenesis and Clinical Management, 2nd ed. ASM Press / Wiley. [Google Scholar]
- 67. Ebringer A, Rashid T. 2006. Rheumatoid arthritis is an autoimmune disease triggered by Proteus urinary tract infection . J Immunol Res 13:41–48. doi: 10.1080/17402520600576578 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 68. Wilson C, Rashid T, Ebringer A. 2015. Worldwide links between Proteus mirabilis and rheumatoid arthritis. J Arthritis 4:142–145. doi: 10.4172/2167-7921.1000142 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 69. Krajden S, Fuksa M, Petrea C, Crisp LJ, Penner JL. 1987. Expanded clinical spectrum of infections caused by Proteus penneri. J Clin Microbiol 25:578–579. doi: 10.1128/jcm.25.3.578-579.1987 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 70. Craig J. 1997. Acute pyelonephritis in a child caused by Proteus penneri. Aust N Z J Med 27:347–348. doi: 10.1111/j.1445-5994.1997.tb01998.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71. Latuszynski DK, Schoch P, Qadir MT, Cunha BA. 1998. Proteus penneri urosepsis in a patient with diabetes mellitus. Heart & Lung 27:146–148. doi: 10.1016/S0147-9563(98)90023-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 72. Engler HD, Troy K, Bottone EJ. 1990. Bacteremia and subcutaneous abscess caused by Proteus penneri in a neutropenic host. J Clin Microbiol 28:1645–1646. doi: 10.1128/jcm.28.7.1645-1646.1990 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 73. Stock I. 2003. Natural antibiotic susceptibility of Proteus spp., with special reference to P. mirabilis and P. penneri strains. J Chemother 15:12–26. doi: 10.1179/joc.2003.15.1.12 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 74. Laupland KB, Edwards F, Harris PNA. 2024. Proteus species bloodstream infections: comparative epidemiology of three species. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 109:116286. doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2024.116286 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 75. Thabit A, Abd El-Sabour E, Nafie A, El-Mokhtar M, Biomy Y. 2020. Detection of proteus species in diabetic wounds and their antibiotic resistance profile analysis. Bulletin of Pharmaceutical Sciences. Assiut 43:1–10. doi: 10.21608/bfsa.2020.93523 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 76. Alwan MJ, Lafta IJ, Hamzah AM. 2011. Bacterial isolation from burn wound infections and studying their antimicrobial susceptibility. Kufa Jou Vete Med Sci 2:121–131. doi: 10.36326/kjvs/2011/v2i14025 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 77. Rath S, Padhy RN. 2015. Surveillance of acute community acquired urinary tract bacterial infections. Journal of Acute Disease 4:186–195. doi: 10.1016/j.joad.2015.06.001 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 78. Schnitzler J. 1892. Zur Ätiologie der Cystitis. Vienna: . https://www.google.de/books/edition/Zur_%C3%84tiologie_der_Cystitis/x780-2g3jBcC?hl=de&gbpv=1&dq=inauthor:%22Julius+Schnitzler%22&printsec=frontcover. [Google Scholar]
- 79. Medina M, Castillo-Pino E. 2019. An introduction to the epidemiology and burden of urinary tract infections. Ther Adv Urol 11:1756287219832172. doi: 10.1177/1756287219832172 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 80. Schito GC, Naber KG, Botto H, Palou J, Mazzei T, Gualco L, Marchese A. 2009. The ARESC study: an international survey on the antimicrobial resistance of pathogens involved in uncomplicated urinary tract infections. Int J Antimicrob Agents 34:407–413. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2009.04.012 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 81. Rosen DA, Hooton TM, Stamm WE, Humphrey PA, Hultgren SJ. 2007. Detection of intracellular bacterial communities in human urinary tract infection. PLOS Med 4:e329. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040329 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 82. Sheerin NS. 2011. Urinary tract infection. Medicine (Abingdon) 39:384–389. doi: 10.1016/j.mpmed.2011.04.003 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 83. Nicolle LE. 2005. Catheter-related urinary tract infection. Drugs & Aging 22:627–639. doi: 10.2165/00002512-200522080-00001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 84. Warren JW. 2001. Catheter-associated urinary tract infections. Int J Antimicrob Agents 17:299–303. doi: 10.1016/s0924-8579(00)00359-9 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 85. Lo E, Nicolle LE, Coffin SE, Gould C, Maragakis LL, Meddings J, Pegues DA, Pettis AM, Saint S, Yokoe DS. 2014. Strategies to prevent catheter-associated urinary tract infections in acute care hospitals: 2014 update. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 35:464–479. doi: 10.1086/675718 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 86. Hartstein AI, Garber SB, Ward TT, Jones SR, Morthland VH. 1981. Nosocomial urinary tract infection: a prospective evaluation of 108 catheterized patients. Infect Control 2:380–386. doi: 10.1017/S0195941700055533 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 87. Schaeffer AJ, Chmiel J. 1983. Urethral meatal colonization in the pathogenesis of catheter-associated bacteriuria. J Urol 130:1096–1099. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)51701-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 88. Tambyah PA, Halvorson KT, Maki DG. 1999. A prospective study of pathogenesis of catheter-associated urinary tract infections. Mayo Clin Proc 74:131–136. doi: 10.4065/74.2.131 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 89. Mathur P. 2018. Prevention of healthcare-associated infections in low- and middle-income countries: the “bundle approach”. Indian J Med Microbiol 36:155–162. doi: 10.4103/ijmm.IJMM_18_152 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 90. Barford JMT, Anson K, Hu Y, Coates ARM. 2008. A model of catheter-associated urinary tract infection initiated by bacterial contamination of the catheter tip. BJU Int 102:67–74. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2008.07465.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 91. Mathur S, Sabbuba NA, Suller MTE, Stickler DJ, Feneley RCL. 2005. Genotyping of urinary and fecal Proteus mirabilis isolates from individuals with long-term urinary catheters. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 24:643–644. doi: 10.1007/s10096-005-0003-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 92. Warren JW. 1996. Clinical presentations and epidemiology of urinary tract infections. Urinary tract infections: molecular pathogenesis and clinical management. ASM Press, Washington, DC. [Google Scholar]
- 93. Roberts JA, Fussell EN, Kaack MB. 1990. Bacterial adherence to urethral catheters. Journal of Urology 144:264–269. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(17)39428-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 94. Garcia MM, Gulati S, Liepmann D, Stackhouse GB, Greene K, Stoller ML. 2007. Traditional Foley drainage systems--do they drain the bladder? J Urol 177:203–207. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2006.08.101 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 95. Stickler D, Ganderton L, King J, Nettleton J, Winters C. 1993. Proteus mirabilis biofilms and the encrustation of urethral catheters. Urol Res 21:407–411. doi: 10.1007/BF00300077 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 96. Stickler D, Hughes G. 1999. Ability of Proteus mirabilis to swarm over urethral catheters. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 18:206–208. doi: 10.1007/s100960050260 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 97. Jones GL, Russell AD, Caliskan Z, Stickler DJ. 2005. A strategy for the control of catheter blockage by crystalline Proteus mirabilis biofilm using the antibacterial agent triclosan. Eur Urol 48:838–845. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2005.07.004 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 98. Fraser GM, Furness RB, Hughes C. 1999. Swarming Migration by Proteus and Related Bacteria. John Wiley & Sons Ltd. [Google Scholar]
- 99. Reid G, Denstedt JD, Kang YS, Lam D, Nause C. 1992. Microbial adhesion and biofilm formation on ureteral stents in vitro and in vivo. J Urol 148:1592–1594. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)36976-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 100. Aiassa V, Barnes AI, Albesa I. 2010. Resistance to ciprofloxacin by enhancement of antioxidant defenses in biofilm and planktonic Proteus mirabilis. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 393:84–88. doi: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2010.01.083 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 101. Høiby N, Bjarnsholt T, Givskov M, Molin S, Ciofu O. 2010. Antibiotic resistance of bacterial biofilms. Int J Antimicrob Agents 35:322–332. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2009.12.011 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 102. Mobley HL, Belas R, Lockatell V, Chippendale G, Trifillis AL, Johnson DE, Warren JW. 1996. Construction of a flagellum-negative mutant of Proteus mirabilis: effect on internalization by human renal epithelial cells and virulence in a mouse model of ascending urinary tract infection. Infect Immun 64:5332–5340. doi: 10.1128/iai.64.12.5332-5340.1996 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 103. Oelschlaeger TA, Tall BD. 1997. Invasion of cultured human epithelial cells by Klebsiella pneumoniae isolated from the urinary tract. Infect Immun 65:2950–2958. doi: 10.1128/iai.65.7.2950-2958.1997 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 104. Oelschlaeger TA, Tall BD. 1996. Uptake pathways of clinical isolates of Proteus mirabilis into human epithelial cell lines. Microb Pathog 21:1–16. doi: 10.1006/mpat.1996.0037 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 105. Peerbooms PG, Verweij AM, MacLaren DM. 1984. Vero cell invasiveness of Proteus mirabilis. Infect Immun 43:1068–1071. doi: 10.1128/iai.43.3.1068-1071.1984 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 106. Schaffer JN, Norsworthy AN, Sun T-T, Pearson MM. 2016. Proteus mirabilis fimbriae- and urease-dependent clusters assemble in an extracellular niche to initiate bladder stone formation . Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 113:4494–4499. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1601720113 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 107. Chippendale GR, Warren JW, Trifillis AL, Mobley HL. 1994. Internalization of Proteus mirabilis by human renal epithelial cells. Infect Immun 62:3115–3121. doi: 10.1128/iai.62.8.3115-3121.1994 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 108. Allison C, Coleman N, Jones PL, Hughes C. 1992. Ability of Proteus mirabilis to invade human urothelial cells is coupled to motility and swarming differentiation. Infect Immun 60:4740–4746. doi: 10.1128/iai.60.11.4740-4746.1992 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 109. Singh S, Singh SK, Chowdhury I, Singh R. 2017. Understanding the mechanism of bacterial biofilms resistance to antimicrobial agents. Open Microbiol J 11:53–62. doi: 10.2174/1874285801711010053 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 110. Mah T-F. 2012. Biofilm-specific antibiotic resistance. Future Microbiol 7:1061–1072. doi: 10.2217/fmb.12.76 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 111. Li Y, Xiao P, Wang Y, Hao Y. 2020. Mechanisms and control measures of mature biofilm resistance to antimicrobial agents in the clinical context. ACS Omega 5:22684–22690. doi: 10.1021/acsomega.0c02294 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 112. Dincer S, Uslu FM, Delik A. 2020. Antibiotic resistance in biofilm. In Bacterial biofilms. IntechOpen, London, UK. [Google Scholar]
- 113. Moryl M, Torzewska A, Jałmuzna P, Rózalski A. 2013. Analysis of Proteus mirabilis distribution in multi-species biofilms on urinary catheters and determination of bacteria resistance to antimicrobial agents. Pol J Microbiol 62:377–384. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 114. Armbruster CE, Smith SN, Johnson AO, DeOrnellas V, Eaton KA, Yep A, Mody L, Wu W, Mobley HLT. 2017. The pathogenic potential of Proteus mirabilis is enhanced by other uropathogens during polymicrobial urinary tract infection. Infect Immun 85:e00808-16. doi: 10.1128/IAI.00808-16 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 115. Alamuri P, Eaton KA, Himpsl SD, Smith SN, Mobley HLT. 2009. Vaccination with proteus toxic agglutinin, a hemolysin-independent cytotoxin in vivo, protects against Proteus mirabilis urinary tract infection. Infect Immun 77:632–641. doi: 10.1128/IAI.01050-08 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 116. Norsworthy AN, Pearson MM. 2017. From catheter to kidney stone: the uropathogenic lifestyle of Proteus mirabilis. Trends Microbiol 25:304–315. doi: 10.1016/j.tim.2016.11.015 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 117. Li X, Zhao H, Lockatell CV, Drachenberg CB, Johnson DE, Mobley HLT. 2002. Visualization of Proteus mirabilis within the matrix of urease-induced bladder stones during experimental urinary tract infection. Infect Immun 70:389–394. doi: 10.1128/IAI.70.1.389-394.2002 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 118. Prywer J, Sadowski RR, Torzewska A. 2015. Aggregation of struvite, carbonate apatite, and Proteus mirabilis as a key factor of infectious urinary stone formation . Crystal Growth & Design 15:1446–1451. doi: 10.1021/cg5018032 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 119. Gatermann S, John J, Marre R. 1989. Staphylococcus saprophyticus urease: characterization and contribution to uropathogenicity in unobstructed urinary tract infection of rats. Infect Immun 57:110–116. doi: 10.1128/iai.57.1.110-116.1989 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 120. Jones BD, Mobley HL. 1987. Genetic and biochemical diversity of ureases of Proteus, Providencia, and Morganella species isolated from urinary tract infection. Infect Immun 55:2198–2203. doi: 10.1128/iai.55.9.2198-2203.1987 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 121. Stuart CA, Van Stratum E, Rustigian R. 1945. Further studies on urease production by Proteus and related organisms. J Bacteriol 49:437–444. doi: 10.1128/jb.49.5.437-444.1945 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 122. Griffith DP, Musher DM, Itin C. 1976. Urease. The primary cause of infection-induced urinary stones. Invest Urol 13:346–350. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 123. Coker C, Poore CA, Li X, Mobley HLT. 2000. Pathogenesis of Proteus mirabilis urinary tract infection. Microbes Infect 2:1497–1505. doi: 10.1016/s1286-4579(00)01304-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 124. Rózalski A, Sidorczyk Z, Kotełko K. 1997. Potential virulence factors of Proteus bacilli. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 61:65–89. doi: 10.1128/mmbr.61.1.65-89.1997 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 125. Stickler DJ, Zimakoff J. 1994. Complications of urinary tract infections associated with devices used for long-term bladder management. J Hosp Infect 28:177–194. doi: 10.1016/0195-6701(94)90101-5 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 126. Stickler DJ. 2008. Bacterial biofilms in patients with indwelling urinary catheters. Nat Clin Pract Urol 5:598–608. doi: 10.1038/ncpuro1231 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 127. Jacobsen SM, Shirtliff ME. 2011. Proteus mirabilis biofilms and catheter-associated urinary tract infections. Virulence 2:460–465. doi: 10.4161/viru.2.5.17783 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 128. Kunin CM. 1989. Blockage of urinary catheters: role of microorganisms and constituents of the urine on formation of encrustations. J Clin Epidemiol 42:835–842. doi: 10.1016/0895-4356(89)90096-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 129. Prywer J, Olszynski M. 2017. Bacterially induced formation of infectious urinary stones: recent developments and future challenges. Curr Med Chem 24:292–311. doi: 10.2174/0929867323666161028154545 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 130. Braude AI, Siemienski J. 1960. Role of bacterial urease in experimental pyelonephritis. J Bacteriol 80:171–179. doi: 10.1128/jb.80.2.171-179.1960 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 131. Tocut M, Zohar I, Schwartz O, Yossepowitch O, Maor Y. 2022. Short- and long-term mortality in patients with urosepsis caused by Escherichia coli susceptible and resistant to 3rd generation cephalosporins. BMC Infect Dis 22:571. doi: 10.1186/s12879-022-07538-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 132. Lee C-C, Lee C-H, Hong M-Y, Hsieh C-C, Tang H-J, Ko W-C. 2018. Propensity-matched analysis of the impact of extended-spectrum β-lactamase production on adults with community-onset Escherichia coli, Klebsiella species, and Proteus mirabilis bacteremia. Journal of Microbiology, Immunology and Infection 51:519–526. doi: 10.1016/j.jmii.2017.05.006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 133. Müller HE. 1986. Occurrence and pathogenic role of Morganella-Proteus-Providencia group bacteria in human feces. J Clin Microbiol 23:404–405. doi: 10.1128/jcm.23.2.404-405.1986 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 134. Wang Y, Zhang S, Yu J, Zhang H, Yuan Z, Sun Y, Zhang L, Zhu Y, Song H. 2010. An outbreak of Proteus mirabilis food poisoning associated with eating stewed pork balls in brown sauce, Beijing. Food Control 21:302–305. doi: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2009.06.009 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 135. Castaño-Rodríguez N, Underwood AP, Merif J, Riordan SM, Rawlinson WD, Mitchell HM, Kaakoush NO. 2018. Gut microbiome analysis identifies potential etiological factors in acute gastroenteritis. Infect Immun 86. doi: 10.1128/IAI.00060-18 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 136. Hamilton AL, Kamm MA, Ng SC, Morrison M. 2018. Proteus spp. as putative gastrointestinal pathogens. Clin Microbiol Rev 31:e00085-17. doi: 10.1128/CMR.00085-17 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 137. Carding S, Verbeke K, Vipond DT, Corfe BM, Owen LJ. 2015. Dysbiosis of the gut microbiota in disease. Microb Ecol Health Dis 26:26191. doi: 10.3402/mehd.v26.26191 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 138. Amin OM. 2011. The contribution of pathogenic bacteria to GI symptoms in parasite-free patients. J Bacteriol Parasitol 2. doi: 10.4172/2155-9597.1000109 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 139. Ambrose NS, Johnson M, Burdon DW, Keighley MRB. 1984. Incidence of pathogenic bacteria from mesenteric lymph nodes and ileal serosa during Crohn’s disease surgery. Journal of British Surgery 71:623–625. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800710821 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 140. Mondot S, Kang S, Furet JP, Aguirre de Carcer D, McSweeney C, Morrison M, Marteau P, Doré J, Leclerc M. 2011. Highlighting new phylogenetic specificities of Crohn’s disease microbiota. Inflamm Bowel Dis 17:185–192. doi: 10.1002/ibd.21436 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 141. Zhang J, Hoedt EC, Liu Q, Berendsen E, Teh JJ, Hamilton A, O’ Brien AW, Ching JYL, Wei H, Yang K, Xu Z, Wong SH, Mak JWY, Sung JJY, Morrison M, Yu J, Kamm MA, Ng SC. 2021. Elucidation of Proteus mirabilis as a key bacterium in Crohn’s disease inflammation. Gastroenterology 160:317–330. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2020.09.036 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 142. Wright EK, Kamm MA, Wagner J, Teo S-M, Cruz PD, Hamilton AL, Ritchie KJ, Inouye M, Kirkwood CD. 2017. Microbial factors associated with postoperative crohn’s disease recurrence. ECCOJC 11:191–203. doi: 10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjw136 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 143. Yeh C-L, Lai K-H, Lo G-H, Lin C-K, Hsu P-I, Chan H-H, Tsai W-L, Lin C-P. 2003. Endoscopic treatment in a patient with obstructive jaundice caused by pancreatic pseudocyst. J Chin Med Assoc 66:555–559. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 144. Lal D, Gorbach SL, Levitan R. 1972. Intestinal microflora in patients with alcoholic cirrhosis: urea-splitting bacteria and neomycin resistance. Gastroenterology 62:275–279. doi: 10.1016/S0016-5085(72)80180-X [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 145. Bajaj JS, Hylemon PB, Ridlon JM, Heuman DM, Daita K, White MB, Monteith P, Noble NA, Sikaroodi M, Gillevet PM. 2012. Colonic mucosal microbiome differs from stool microbiome in cirrhosis and hepatic encephalopathy and is linked to cognition and inflammation. American Journal of Physiology-Gastrointestinal and Liver Physiology 303:G675–G685. doi: 10.1152/ajpgi.00152.2012 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 146. Vaishnavi C, Samanta J, Kochhar R. 2018. Characterization of biofilms in biliary stents and potential factors involved in occlusion. WJG 24:112–123. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v24.i1.112 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 147. Garrett WS, Gallini CA, Yatsunenko T, Michaud M, DuBois A, Delaney ML, Punit S, Karlsson M, Bry L, Glickman JN, Gordon JI, Onderdonk AB, Glimcher LH. 2010. Enterobacteriaceae act in concert with the gut microbiota to induce spontaneous and maternally transmitted colitis. Cell Host & Microbe 8:292–300. doi: 10.1016/j.chom.2010.08.004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 148. Liu KL, Lee TC, Lin MT, Chen SJ. 2007. Gastrointestinal: abdominal abscess associated with a ventriculoperitoneal shunt. J of Gastro and Hepatol 22:757–757. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1746.2007.04964.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 149. Segal R, Dan M, Pogoreliuk I, Leibovitz A. 2006. Pathogenic colonization of the stomach in enterally fed elderly patients: comparing percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy with nasogastric tube. J American Geriatrics Society 54:1905–1908. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2006.00964.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 150. Segal R, Pogoreliuk I, Dan M, Baumoehl Y, Leibovitz A. 2006. Gastric microbiota in elderly patients fed via nasogastric tubes for prolonged periods. Journal of Hospital Infection 63:79–83. doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2005.11.005 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 151. Vaishnavi C, Kapoor P, Kochhar R. 2014. Su1148 bacterial biofilms produced in stents retrieved from patients with biliary and pancreatic diseases. Gastroenterology 146:S–389. doi: 10.1016/S0016-5085(14)61396-2 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 152. Tićac B, Tićac R, Rukavina T, Kesovija PG, Pedisić D, Maljevac B, Starčević R. 2010. Microbial colonization of tracheoesophageal voice prostheses (Provox2) following total laryngectomy. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 267:1579–1586. doi: 10.1007/s00405-010-1253-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 153. Machado AP, Pimenta ATM, Contijo PP, Geocze S, Fischman O. 2006. Microbiologic profile of flexible endoscope disinfection in two Brazilian hospitals. Arq Gastroenterol 43:255–258. doi: 10.1590/s0004-28032006000400002 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 154. Chow AW, Taylor PR, Yoshikawa TT, Guze LB. 1979. A nosocomial outbreak of infections due to multiply resistant Proteus mirabilis: role of intestinal colonization as a major reservoir. J Infect Dis 139:621–627. doi: 10.1093/infdis/139.6.621 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 155. Lawrence RC, Helmick CG, Arnett FC, Deyo RA, Felson DT, Giannini EH, Heyse SP, Hirsch R, Hochberg MC, Hunder GG, Liang MH, Pillemer SR, Steen VD, Wolfe F. 1998. Estimates of the prevalence of arthritis and selected musculoskeletal disorders in the United States. Arthritis & Rheumatism 41:778–799. doi: 10.1002/1529-0131(199805)41:5<778::AID-ART4>3.0.CO;2-V [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 156. Almutairi K, Nossent J, Preen D, Keen H, Inderjeeth C. 2021. The global prevalence of rheumatoid arthritis: a meta-analysis based on a systematic review. Rheumatol Int 41:863–877. doi: 10.1007/s00296-020-04731-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 157. Chandler RW, Robinson H, Masi AT. 1971. Serological investigations for evidence of an infectious aetiology of rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 30:274–278. doi: 10.1136/ard.30.3.274 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 158. Ebringer A, Cunningham P, Ahmadi K, Wrigglesworth J, Hosseini R, Wilson C. 1992. Sequence similarity between HLA-DR1 and DR4 subtypes associated with rheumatoid arthritis and proteus/serratia membrane haemolysins. Ann Rheum Dis 51:1245–1246. doi: 10.1136/ard.51.11.1245 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 159. Wilson C, Ebringer A, Ahmadi K, Wrigglesworth J, Tiwana H, Fielder M, Binder A, Ettelaie C, Cunningham P, Joannou C. 1995. Shared amino acid sequences between major histocompatibility complex class II glycoproteins, type XI collagen and Proteus mirabilis in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 54:216–220. doi: 10.1136/ard.54.3.216 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 160. Tiwana H, Wilson C, Alvarez A, Abuknesha R, Bansal S, Ebringer A. 1999. Cross-reactivity between the rheumatoid arthritis-associated motif EQKRAA and structurally related sequences found in Proteus mirabilis. Infect Immun 67:2769–2775. doi: 10.1128/IAI.67.6.2769-2775.1999 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 161. Wilson C, Rashid T, Tiwana H, Beyan H, Hughes L, Bansal S, Ebringer A, Binder A. 2003. Cytotoxicity responses to peptide antigens in rheumatoid arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis. J Rheumatol 30:972–978. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 162. Ebringer A, Rashid T, Wilson C. 2003. Rheumatoid arthritis: proposal for the use of anti-microbial therapy in early cases. Scand J Rheumatol 32:2–11. doi: 10.1080/03009740310000337 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 163. Senior BW, Anderson GA, Morley KD, Kerr MA. 1999. Evidence that patients with rheumatoid arthritis have asymptomatic “non-significant” Proteus mirabilis bacteriuria more frequently than healthy controls. J Infect 38:99–106. doi: 10.1016/s0163-4453(99)90076-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 164. Jin J, Li J, Hou M, Ding X, Zhong Y, He J, Sun X, Ye H, Li R, Wu L, Wang J, Guo J, Li Z. 2023. A shifted urinary microbiota associated with disease activity and immune responses in rheumatoid arthritis. Microbiol Spectr 11:e0366222. doi: 10.1128/spectrum.03662-22 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 165. Durlik-Popińska K, Żarnowiec P, Lechowicz Ł, Gawęda J, Kaca W. 2020. Antibodies isolated from rheumatoid arthritis patients against lysine-containing Proteus mirabilis O3 (S1959) lipopolysaccharide may react with collagen type I. IJMS 21:9635. doi: 10.3390/ijms21249635 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 166. Harshey RM, Matsuyama T. 1994. Dimorphic transition in Escherichia coli and Salmonella typhimurium: surface-induced differentiation into hyperflagellate swarmer cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 91:8631–8635. doi: 10.1073/pnas.91.18.8631 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 167. Rather PN. 2005. Swarmer cell differentiation in Proteus mirabilis. Environ Microbiol 7:1065–1073. doi: 10.1111/j.1462-2920.2005.00806.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 168. Jones HE, Park RWA. 1967. The influence of medium composition on the growth and swarming of Proteus. J Gen Microbiol 47:369–378. doi: 10.1099/00221287-47-3-369 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 169. Belas R, Erskine D, Flaherty D. 1991. Proteus mirabilis mutants defective in swarmer cell differentiation and multicellular behavior. J Bacteriol 173:6279–6288. doi: 10.1128/jb.173.19.6279-6288.1991 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 170. Jones BV, Young R, Mahenthiralingam E, Stickler DJ. 2004. Ultrastructure of Proteus mirabilis swarmer cell rafts and role of swarming in catheter-associated urinary tract infection. Infect Immun 72:3941–3950. doi: 10.1128/IAI.72.7.3941-3950.2004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 171. Aktar U, Chouduri A, Wadud A, Anwar U, Islam MAU. 2014. Extended spectrum multi-drug resistance versus pathogenic factors-swarming, proteases, and urease-of Proteus species. International Research Journal of Microbiology. doi: 10.14303/irjm.2013.052 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 172. Pearson MM, Rasko DA, Smith SN, Mobley HLT. 2010. Transcriptome of swarming Proteus mirabilis. Infect Immun 78:2834–2845. doi: 10.1128/IAI.01222-09 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 173. Allison C, Emödy L, Coleman N, Hughes C. 1994. The role of swarm cell differentiation and multicellular migration in the uropathogenicity of Proteus mirabilis. J Infect Dis 169:1155–1158. doi: 10.1093/infdis/169.5.1155 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 174. Czerwonka G, Guzy A, Kałuża K, Grosicka M, Dańczuk M, Lechowicz Ł, Gmiter D, Kowalczyk P, Kaca W. 2016. The role of Proteus mirabilis cell wall features in biofilm formation. Arch Microbiol 198:877–884. doi: 10.1007/s00203-016-1249-x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 175. Pellegrino R, Scavone P, Umpiérrez A, Maskell DJ, Zunino P. 2013. Proteus mirabilis uroepithelial cell adhesin (UCA) fimbria plays a role in the colonization of the urinary tract. Pathog Dis 67:104–107. doi: 10.1111/2049-632X.12027 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 176. Kuan L, Schaffer JN, Zouzias CD, Pearson MM. 2014. Characterization of 17 chaperone-usher fimbriae encoded by Proteus mirabilis reveals strong conservation. J Med Microbiol 63:911–922. doi: 10.1099/jmm.0.069971-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 177. Welch RA, Burland V, Plunkett G III, Redford P, Roesch P, Rasko D, Buckles EL, Liou S-R, Boutin A, Hackett J, Stroud D, Mayhew GF, Rose DJ, Zhou S, Schwartz DC, Perna NT, Mobley HLT, Donnenberg MS, Blattner FR. 2002. Extensive mosaic structure revealed by the complete genome sequence of uropathogenic Escherichia coli. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:17020–17024. doi: 10.1073/pnas.252529799 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 178. Johnson DE, Lockatell CV, Russell RG, Hebel JR, Island MD, Stapleton A, Stamm WE, Warren JW. 1998. Comparison of Escherichia coli strains recovered from human cystitis and pyelonephritis infections in transurethrally challenged mice. Infect Immun 66:3059–3065. doi: 10.1128/IAI.66.7.3059-3065.1998 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 179. Bahrani-Mougeot FK, Pancholi S, Daoust M, Donnenberg MS. 2001. Identification of putative urovirulence genes by subtractive cloning. J Infect Dis 183 Suppl 1:S21–3. doi: 10.1086/318845 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 180. Jansen AM, Lockatell V, Johnson DE, Mobley HLT. 2004. Mannose-resistant Proteus-like fimbriae are produced by most Proteus mirabilis strains infecting the urinary tract, dictate the in vivo localization of bacteria, and contribute to biofilm formation. Infect Immun 72:7294–7305. doi: 10.1128/IAI.72.12.7294-7305.2004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 181. Li XIN, Johnson DE, Mobley HLT. 1999. Requirement of MrpH for mannose-resistant Proteus -like fimbria-mediated hemagglutination by Proteus mirabilis. Infect Immun 67:2822–2833. doi: 10.1128/IAI.67.6.2822-2833.1999 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 182. Scavone P, Iribarnegaray V, Caetano AL, Schlapp G, Härtel S, Zunino P. 2016. Fimbriae have distinguishable roles in Proteus mirabilis biofilm formation . Pathog Dis 74:ftw033. doi: 10.1093/femspd/ftw033 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 183. Zunino P, Geymonat L, Allen AG, Preston A, Sosa V, Maskell DJ. 2001. New aspects of the role of MR/P fimbriae in Proteus mirabilis urinary tract infection . FEMS Immunology & Medical Microbiology 31:113–120. doi: 10.1111/j.1574-695X.2001.tb00507.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 184. Bahrani FK, Massad G, Lockatell CV, Johnson DE, Russell RG, Warren JW, Mobley HL. 1994. Construction of an MR/P fimbrial mutant of Proteus mirabilis: role in virulence in a mouse model of ascending urinary tract infection. Infect Immun 62:3363–3371. doi: 10.1128/iai.62.8.3363-3371.1994 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 185. Wray SK, Hull SI, Cook RG, Barrish J, Hull RA. 1986. Identification and characterization of a uroepithelial cell adhesin from a uropathogenic isolate of Proteus mirabilis. Infect Immun 54:43–49. doi: 10.1128/iai.54.1.43-49.1986 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 186. Tolson DL, Barrigar DL, McLean RJ, Altman E. 1995. Expression of a nonagglutinating fimbria by Proteus mirabilis. Infect Immun 63:1127–1129. doi: 10.1128/iai.63.3.1127-1129.1995 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 187. Armbruster CE, Forsyth-DeOrnellas V, Johnson AO, Smith SN, Zhao L, Wu W, Mobley HLT. 2017. Genome-wide transposon mutagenesis of Proteus mirabilis: essential genes, fitness factors for catheter-associated urinary tract infection, and the impact of polymicrobial infection on fitness requirements. PLoS Pathog 13:e1006434. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1006434 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 188. Massad G, Lockatell CV, Johnson DE, Mobley HL. 1994. Proteus mirabilis fimbriae: construction of an isogenic pmfA mutant and analysis of virulence in a CBA mouse model of ascending urinary tract infection. Infect Immun 62:536–542. doi: 10.1128/iai.62.2.536-542.1994 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 189. Zunino P, Sosa V, Allen AG, Preston A, Schlapp G, Maskell DJ. 2003. Proteus mirabilis fimbriae (PMF) are important for both bladder and kidney colonization in mice. Microbiology (Reading, Engl) 149:3231–3237. doi: 10.1099/mic.0.26534-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 190. Savoia D, Martinetto P, Achino A, Pugliese A. 1983. Adhesion of Proteus species to various cell types. Eur J Clin Microbiol 2:571–576. doi: 10.1007/BF02016568 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 191. Saha MR, Uddin MN, Akter MR, Shathi IA, Haque MA, Rahman BM, Kafi MA, Tokumoto T, Chouduri AU. 2024. EDTA, aspirin and d-mannose inhibit the biofilm formation of Proteus vulgaris by hindering its adhesion to catheter devices: a proposed strategy for CAUTI prevention. J Med Microbiol 73. doi: 10.1099/jmm.0.001909 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 192. Myszka K, Czaczyk K, Schmidt MT, Olejnik AM. 2007. Cell surface properties as factors involved in Proteus vulgaris adhesion to stainless steel under starvation conditions. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 23:1605–1612. doi: 10.1007/s11274-007-9406-7 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 193. Yakubu DE, Old DC, Senior BW. 1989. The haemagglutinins and fimbriae of Proteus penneri. J Med Microbiol 30:279–284. doi: 10.1099/00222615-30-4-279 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 194. Alamuri P, Löwer M, Hiss JA, Himpsl SD, Schneider G, Mobley HLT. 2010. Adhesion, invasion, and agglutination mediated by two trimeric autotransporters in the human uropathogen Proteus mirabilis. Infect Immun 78:4882–4894. doi: 10.1128/IAI.00718-10 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 195. Swihart KG, Welch RA. 1990. Cytotoxic activity of the Proteus hemolysin HpmA. Infect Immun 58:1861–1869. doi: 10.1128/iai.58.6.1861-1869.1990 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 196. Zunino P, Sosa V, Schlapp G, Allen AG, Preston A, Maskell DJ. 2007. Mannose-resistant Proteus-like and P. mirabilis fimbriae have specific and additive roles in P. mirabilis urinary tract infections. FEMS Immunology & Medical Microbiology 51. doi: 10.1111/j.1574-695X.2007.00285.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 197. Lane MC, Li X, Pearson MM, Simms AN, Mobley HLT. 2009. Oxygen-limiting conditions enrich for fimbriate cells of uropathogenic Proteus mirabilis and Escherichia coli. J Bacteriol 191:1382–1392. doi: 10.1128/JB.01550-08 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 198. Himpsl SD, Pearson MM, Arewång CJ, Nusca TD, Sherman DH, Mobley HLT. 2010. Proteobactin and a yersiniabactin-related siderophore mediate iron acquisition in Proteus mirabilis. Mol Microbiol 78:138–157. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2958.2010.07317.x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 199. Jones BD, Lockatell CV, Johnson DE, Warren JW, Mobley HL. 1990. Construction of a urease-negative mutant of Proteus mirabilis: analysis of virulence in a mouse model of ascending urinary tract infection. Infect Immun 58:1120–1123. doi: 10.1128/iai.58.4.1120-1123.1990 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 200. Walker KE, Moghaddame-Jafari S, Lockatell CV, Johnson D, Belas R. 1999. ZapA, the IgA-degrading metalloprotease of Proteus mirabilis, is a virulence factor expressed specifically in swarmer cells. Mol Microbiol 32:825–836. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2958.1999.01401.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 201. Harrison JJ, Ceri H, Turner RJ. 2007. Multimetal resistance and tolerance in microbial biofilms. Nat Rev Microbiol 5:928–938. doi: 10.1038/nrmicro1774 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 202. Hostacká A, Ciznár I, Stefkovicová M. 2010. Temperature and pH affect the production of bacterial biofilm. Folia Microbiol (Praha) 55:75–78. doi: 10.1007/s12223-010-0012-y [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 203. Kim LH, Chong TH. 2017. Physiological responses of salinity-stressed Vibrio sp. and the effect on the biofilm formation on a nanofiltration membrane . Environ Sci Technol 51:1249–1258. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.6b02904 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 204. Hou J, Veeregowda DH, van de Belt-Gritter B, Busscher HJ, van der Mei HC. 2018. Extracellular polymeric matrix production and relaxation under fluid shear and mechanical pressure in Staphylococcus aureus biofilms. Appl Environ Microbiol 84. doi: 10.1128/AEM.01516-17 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 205. Marsden AE, Grudzinski K, Ondrey JM, DeLoney-Marino CR, Visick KL. 2017. Impact of salt and nutrient content on biofilm formation by Vibrio fischeri. PLoS One 12:e0169521. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0169521 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 206. Ciofu O, Rojo-Molinero E, Macià MD, Oliver A. 2017. Antibiotic treatment of biofilm infections. APMIS 125:304–319. doi: 10.1111/apm.12673 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 207. Pickard R, Lam T, MacLennan G, Starr K, Kilonzo M, McPherson G, Gillies K, McDonald A, Walton K, Buckley B, Glazener C, Boachie C, Burr J, Norrie J, Vale L, Grant A, N’Dow J. 2012. Antimicrobial catheters for reduction of symptomatic urinary tract infection in adults requiring short-term catheterisation in hospital: a multicentre randomised controlled trial. The Lancet 380:1927–1935. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61380-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 208. Colletta A, Wu J, Wo Y, Kappler M, Chen H, Xi C, Meyerhoff ME. 2015. S -Nitroso- N -acetylpenicillamine (SNAP) impregnated silicone foley catheters: a potential biomaterial/device to prevent catheter-associated urinary tract infections . ACS Biomater Sci Eng 1:416–424. doi: 10.1021/acsbiomaterials.5b00032 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 209. Wang C, Sauvageau D, Elias A. 2016. Immobilization of active bacteriophages on polyhydroxyalkanoate surfaces. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 8:1128–1138. doi: 10.1021/acsami.5b08664 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 210. Guay DR. 2001. An update on the role of nitrofurans in the management of urinary tract infections. Drugs (Abingdon Engl) 61:353–364. doi: 10.2165/00003495-200161030-00004 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 211. Knop K, Hoogenboom R, Fischer D, Schubert US. 2010. Poly(ethylene glycol) in drug delivery: pros and cons as well as potential alternatives. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 49:6288–6308. doi: 10.1002/anie.200902672 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 212. Konradi R, Acikgoz C, Textor M. 2012. Polyoxazolines for nonfouling surface coatings--a direct comparison to the gold standard PEG. Macromol Rapid Commun 33:1663–1676. doi: 10.1002/marc.201200422 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 213. Holowka EP, Bhatia SK, Holowka EP, Bhatia SK. 2014. Controlled-release systems, p 62. In Drug Delivery: materials design and clinical perspective. Vol. 7. Springer. [Google Scholar]
- 214. Cloutier M, Mantovani D, Rosei F. 2015. Antibacterial coatings: challenges, perspectives, and opportunities. Trends Biotechnol 33:637–652. doi: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2015.09.002 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 215. Levering V, Cao C, Shivapooja P, Levinson H, Zhao X, López GP. 2016. Urinary catheter capable of repeated on-demand removal of infectious biofilms via active deformation. Biomaterials 77:77–86. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2015.10.070 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 216. Britt RG. 2013. Urinary catheter that prevents bladder infections. US20130030415A1, issued
- 217. Zumeris J, Jacob H. 2010. Acoustic add-on device for biofilm prevention in urinary catheter. US7829029B2, issued
- 218. Sun Y, Zeng Q, Zhang Z, Xu C, Wang Y, He J. 2011. Decreased urethral mucosal damage and delayed bacterial colonization during short-term urethral catheterization using a novel trefoil urethral catheter profile in rabbits. J Urol 186:1497–1501. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2011.05.043 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 219. Stickler DJ, Jones SM, Adusei GO, Waters MG. 2006. A sensor to detect the early stages in the development of crystalline Proteus mirabilis biofilm on indwelling bladder catheters. J Clin Microbiol 44:1540–1542. doi: 10.1128/JCM.44.4.1540-1542.2006 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 220. Malic S, Waters MGJ, Basil L, Stickler DJ, Williams DW. 2012. Development of an “early warning” sensor for encrustation of urinary catheters following Proteus infection. J Biomed Mater Res 100B:133–137. doi: 10.1002/jbm.b.31930 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 221. Dubern J-F, Hook AL, Carabelli AM, Chang C-Y, Lewis-Lloyd CA, Luckett JC, Burroughs L, Dundas AA, Humes DJ, Irvine DJ, Alexander MR, Williams P. 2023. Discovery of a polymer resistant to bacterial biofilm, swarming, and encrustation. Sci Adv 9:eadd7474. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.add7474 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 222. Gould CV, Umscheid CA, Agarwal RK, Kuntz G, Pegues DA, Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC) . 2010. Guideline for prevention of catheter-associated urinary tract infections 2009. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 31:319–326. doi: 10.1086/651091 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 223. Aiassa V, Barnes AI, Albesa I. 2006. Action of ciprofloxacin on planktonic bacteria and biofilm of Proteus mirabilis . Biofilms 3:11–17. doi: 10.1017/S1479050507002086 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 224. Irwin NJ, McCoy CP, Carson L. 2013. Effect of pH on the in vitro susceptibility of planktonic and biofilm-grown Proteus mirabilis to the quinolone antimicrobials. J Appl Microbiol 115:382–389. doi: 10.1111/jam.12241 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 225. Dhar N, McKinney JD. 2007. Microbial phenotypic heterogeneity and antibiotic tolerance. Curr Opin Microbiol 10:30–38. doi: 10.1016/j.mib.2006.12.007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 226. Walters MC III, Roe F, Bugnicourt A, Franklin MJ, Stewart PS. 2003. Contributions of antibiotic penetration, oxygen limitation, and low metabolic activity to tolerance of Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms to ciprofloxacin and tobramycin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 47:317–323. doi: 10.1128/AAC.47.1.317-323.2003 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 227. Chiang W-C, Nilsson M, Jensen PØ, Høiby N, Nielsen TE, Givskov M, Tolker-Nielsen T. 2013. Extracellular DNA shields against aminoglycosides in Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 57:2352–2361. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00001-13 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 228. Bagge N, Hentzer M, Andersen JB, Ciofu O, Givskov M, Høiby N. 2004. Dynamics and spatial distribution of β-lactamase expression in Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms . Antimicrob Agents Chemother 48:1168–1174. doi: 10.1128/AAC.48.4.1168-1174.2004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 229. Werner E, Roe F, Bugnicourt A, Franklin MJ, Heydorn A, Molin S, Pitts B, Stewart PS. 2004. Stratified growth in Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms. Appl Environ Microbiol 70:6188–6196. doi: 10.1128/AEM.70.10.6188-6196.2004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 230. Brooun A, Liu S, Lewis KIM. 2000. A dose-response study of antibiotic resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms . Antimicrob Agents Chemother 44:640–646. doi: 10.1128/AAC.44.3.640-646.2000 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 231. De Groote VN, Verstraeten N, Fauvart M, Kint CI, Verbeeck AM, Beullens S, Cornelis P, Michiels J. 2009. Novel persistence genes in Pseudomonas aeruginosa identified by high-throughput screening. FEMS Microbiol Lett 297:73–79. doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6968.2009.01657.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 232. Lewis K. 2010. Persister cells. Annu Rev Microbiol 64:357–372. doi: 10.1146/annurev.micro.112408.134306 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 233. Amirthalingam S, Yi KS, Ching LT, Mun NY. 2015. Topical antibacterials and global challenges on resistance development. Trop J Pharm Res 14:919. doi: 10.4314/tjpr.v14i5.24 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 234. Walsh TR, Efthimiou J, Dréno B. 2016. Systematic review of antibiotic resistance in acne: an increasing topical and oral threat. Lancet Infect Dis 16:e23–e33. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(15)00527-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 235. Miller YW, Eady EA, Lacey RW, Cove JH, Joanes DN, Cunliffe WJ. 1996. Sequential antibiotic therapy for acne promotes the carriage of resistant staphylococci on the skin of contacts. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 38:829–837. doi: 10.1093/jac/38.5.829 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 236. Batra A, Roemhild R, Rousseau E, Franzenburg S, Niemann S, Schulenburg H. 2021. High potency of sequential therapy with only β-lactam antibiotics. Elife 10:e68876. doi: 10.7554/eLife.68876 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 237. Fuentes-Hernandez A, Plucain J, Gori F, Pena-Miller R, Reding C, Jansen G, Schulenburg H, Gudelj I, Beardmore R. 2015. Using a sequential regimen to eliminate bacteria at sublethal antibiotic dosages. PLoS Biol 13:e1002104. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002104 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 238. Roemhild R, Barbosa C, Beardmore RE, Jansen G, Schulenburg H. 2015. Temporal variation in antibiotic environments slows down resistance evolution in pathogenic Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Evol Appl 8:945–955. doi: 10.1111/eva.12330 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 239. Maltas J, Wood KB. 2019. Pervasive and diverse collateral sensitivity profiles inform optimal strategies to limit antibiotic resistance. PLoS Biol 17:e3000515. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000515 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 240. Pamp SJ, Gjermansen M, Johansen HK, Tolker-Nielsen T. 2008. Tolerance to the antimicrobial peptide colistin in Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms is linked to metabolically active cells, and depends on the pmr and mexAB-oprM genes. Mol Microbiol 68:223–240. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2958.2008.06152.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 241. Herrmann G, Yang L, Wu H, Song Z, Wang H, Høiby N, Ulrich M, Molin S, Riethmüller J, Döring G. 2010. Colistin-tobramycin combinations are superior to monotherapy concerning the killing of biofilm Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Infect Dis 202:1585–1592. doi: 10.1086/656788 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 242. Yazdi M, Bouzari M, Ghaemi EA. 2018. Isolation and characterization of a lytic bacteriophage (vB_PmiS-TH) and its application in combination with ampicillin against planktonic and biofilm forms of proteus mirabilis isolated from urinary tract infection. Microb Physiol 28:37–46. doi: 10.1159/000487137 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 243. Fitzgerald MJ, Pearson MM, Mobley HLT. 2024. Proteus mirabilis UreR coordinates cellular functions required for urease activity. J Bacteriol 206:e0003124. doi: 10.1128/jb.00031-24 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 244. Alpern RJ, Hebert SC. 2007. Seldin and Giebisch’s The Kidney. In Physiology & Pathophysiology. Vol. 1–2. Academic Press. [Google Scholar]
- 245. Mörsdorf G, Kaltwasser H. 1990. Cloning of the genes encoding urease from Proteus vulgaris and sequencing of the structural genes. FEMS Microbiol Lett 54:67–73. doi: 10.1016/0378-1097(90)90260-w [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 246. Let M, Majhi K, Halder U, De A, Saha D, Chitikineni A, Roychowdhury T, Varshney RK, Bandopadhyay R. 2023. Exploration of urease-mediated biomineralization for defluoridation by Proteus columbae MLN9 with an emphasis on its genomic characterization. J Environ Chem Eng 11:109791. doi: 10.1016/j.jece.2023.109791 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 247. Follmer C. 2010. Ureases as a target for the treatment of gastric and urinary infections. J Clin Pathol 63:424–430. doi: 10.1136/jcp.2009.072595 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 248. Abdullah MA, El-Baky RMA, Hassan HA, Abdelhafez E-S, Abuo-Rahma G-D. 2016. Fluoroquinolones as urease inhibitors: anti-Proteus mirabilis activity and molecular docking studies. Am J Microbiol Res 4:81–84. doi: 10.12691/ajmr-4-3-3 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 249. Nisar M, Khan SA, Shah MR, Khan A, Farooq U, Uddin G, Ahmad B. 2015. Moxifloxacin-capped noble metal nanoparticles as potential urease inhibitors. New J Chem 39:8080–8086. doi: 10.1039/C5NJ01571E [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 250. Loes AN, Ruyle L, Arvizu M, Gresko KE, Wilson AL, Deutch CE. 2014. Inhibition of urease activity in the urinary tract pathogen Staphylococcus saprophyticus. Lett Appl Microbiol 58:31–41. doi: 10.1111/lam.12153 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 251. Williams G, Stothart CI, Hahn D, Stephens JH, Craig JC, Hodson EM. 2023. Cranberries for preventing urinary tract infections. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001321.pub7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 252. Bhagwat S, Haytowitz DB, Holden JM. 2011. USDA database for the flavonoid content of selected foods, release 3. In US Department of Agriculture. Beltsville, MD, USA. [Google Scholar]
- 253. Xiao Z-P, Wang X-D, Peng Z-Y, Huang S, Yang P, Li Q-S, Zhou L-H, Hu X-J, Wu L-J, Zhou Y, Zhu H-L. 2012. Molecular docking, kinetics study, and structure-activity relationship analysis of quercetin and its analogous as Helicobacter pylori urease inhibitors. J Agric Food Chem 60:10572–10577. doi: 10.1021/jf303393n [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 254. Kafarski P, Talma M. 2018. Recent advances in design of new urease inhibitors: a review. J Adv Res 13:101–112. doi: 10.1016/j.jare.2018.01.007 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 255. Golbabaei S, Bazl R, Golestanian S, Nabati F, Omrany ZB, Yousefi B, Hajiaghaee R, Rezazadeh S, Amanlou M. 2013. Urease inhibitory activities of β-boswellic acid derivatives. DARU 21:2. doi: 10.1186/2008-2231-21-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 256. Zhou J-T, Li C-L, Tan L-H, Xu Y-F, Liu Y-H, Mo Z-Z, Dou Y-X, Su R, Su Z-R, Huang P, et al. 2017. Inhibition of Helicobacter pylori and its associated urease by palmatine. J Agric Food Chem 60:10572–10577. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0168944 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 257. Hanif M, Shoaib K, Saleem M, Hasan Rama N, Zaib S, Iqbal J. 2012. Synthesis, urease inhibition, antioxidant, antibacterial, and molecular docking studies of 1,3,4-oxadiazole derivatives. ISRN Pharmacol 2012:1–9. doi: 10.5402/2012/928901 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 258. Díaz-Sánchez ÁG, Alvarez-Parrilla E, Martínez-Martínez A, Aguirre-Reyes L, Orozpe-Olvera JA, Ramos-Soto MA, Núñez-Gastélum JA, Alvarado-Tenorio B, de la Rosa LA. 2016. Inhibition of urease by disulfiram, an FDA-approved thiol reagent used in humans. Molecules 21:1628. doi: 10.3390/molecules21121628 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 259. Milo S, Heylen RA, Glancy J, Williams GT, Patenall BL, Hathaway HJ, Thet NT, Allinson SL, Laabei M, Jenkins ATA. 2021. A small-molecular inhibitor against Proteus mirabilis urease to treat catheter-associated urinary tract infections. Sci Rep 11:3726. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-83257-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 260. Grela E, Dziełak A, Szydłowska K, Mucha A, Kafarski P, Grabowiecka AM. 2016. Whole-cell Proteus mirabilis urease inhibition by aminophosphinates for the control of struvite formation. J Med Microbiol 65:1123–1129. doi: 10.1099/jmm.0.000342 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 261. Marwick C. 1983. New drugs selectively inhibit kidney stone formation. JAMA 250:321–322. doi: 10.1001/jama.1983.03340030003001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 262. Gale GR. 1965. Inhibition of urease by hydroxyurea. Biochem Pharmacol 14:693–698. doi: 10.1016/0006-2952(65)90086-9 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 263. Flannigan R, Choy WH, Chew B, Lange D. 2014. Renal struvite stones--pathogenesis, microbiology, and management strategies. Nat Rev Urol 11:333–341. doi: 10.1038/nrurol.2014.99 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 264. Papayannopoulos V, Zychlinsky A. 2009. NETs: a new strategy for using old weapons. Trends Immunol 30:513–521. doi: 10.1016/j.it.2009.07.011 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 265. Lee WL, Harrison RE, Grinstein S. 2003. Phagocytosis by neutrophils. Microbes Infect 5:1299–1306. doi: 10.1016/j.micinf.2003.09.014 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 266. Olaitan AO, Morand S, Rolain J-M. 2014. Mechanisms of polymyxin resistance: acquired and intrinsic resistance in bacteria. Front Microbiol 5:643. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2014.00643 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 267. McCoy AJ, Liu H, Falla TJ, Gunn JS. 2001. Identification of Proteus mirabilis mutants with increased sensitivity to antimicrobial peptides . Antimicrob Agents Chemother 45:2030–2037. doi: 10.1128/AAC.45.7.2030-2037.2001 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 268. Belas R, Manos J, Suvanasuthi R. 2004. Proteus mirabilis ZapA metalloprotease degrades a broad spectrum of substrates, including antimicrobial peptides. Infect Immun 72:5159–5167. doi: 10.1128/IAI.72.9.5159-5167.2004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 269. Callewaert L, Vanderkelen L, Deckers D, Aertsen A, Robben J, Michiels CW. 2008. Detection of a lysozyme inhibitor in Proteus mirabilis by a new reverse zymogram method. Appl Environ Microbiol 74:4978–4981. doi: 10.1128/AEM.00219-08 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 270. Ragland SA, Criss AK. 2017. From bacterial killing to immune modulation: recent insights into the functions of lysozyme. PLoS Pathog 13:e1006512. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1006512 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 271. Li X, Mobley HLT. 2002. Vaccines for Proteus mirabilis in urinary tract infection. Int J Antimicrob Agents 19:461–465. doi: 10.1016/s0924-8579(02)00102-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 272. Li X, Lockatell CV, Johnson DE, Lane MC, Warren JW, Mobley HLT. 2004. Development of an intranasal vaccine to prevent urinary tract infection by Proteus mirabilis. Infect Immun 72:66–75. doi: 10.1128/IAI.72.1.66-75.2004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 273. Ullah A, Ullah Khan S, Haq MU, Ahmad S, Irfan M, Asif M, Muhseen ZT, Alkeraidees MS, Allemailem KS, Alrumaihi F, Almatroudi A. 2023. Computational study to investigate Proteus mirabilis proteomes for multi-epitope vaccine construct design . Journal of Biomolecular Structure and Dynamics 41:10190–10201. doi: 10.1080/07391102.2022.2153920 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 274. Moayeri N, Collins CM, O’Hanley P. 1991. Efficacy of a Proteus mirabilis outer membrane protein vaccine in preventing experimental Proteus pyelonephritis in a BALB/c mouse model. Infect Immun 59:3778–3786. doi: 10.1128/iai.59.10.3778-3786.1991 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 275. Choubini E, Habibi M, Khorshidi A, Ghasemi A, Asadi Karam MR, Bouzari S. 2018. A novel multi-peptide subunit vaccine admixed with AddaVax adjuvant produces significant immunogenicity and protection against Proteus mirabilis urinary tract infection in mice model. Mol Immunol 96:88–97. doi: 10.1016/j.molimm.2018.03.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 276. Habibi M, Asadi Karam MR, Bouzari S. 2018. Construction and evaluation of the immune protection of a recombinant divalent protein composed of the MrpA from MR/P fimbriae and flagellin of Proteus mirabilis strain against urinary tract infection. Microb Pathog 117:348–355. doi: 10.1016/j.micpath.2018.02.023 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 277. Uphoff TS, Welch RA. 1990. Nucleotide sequencing of the Proteus mirabilis calcium-independent hemolysin genes (hpmA and hpmB) reveals sequence similarity with the Serratia marcescens hemolysin genes (shlA and shlB). J Bacteriol 172:1206–1216. doi: 10.1128/jb.172.3.1206-1216.1990 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 278. Weaver TM, Hocking JM, Bailey LJ, Wawrzyn GT, Howard DR, Sikkink LA, Ramirez-Alvarado M, Thompson JR. 2009. Structural and functional studies of truncated hemolysin A from Proteus mirabilis. J Biol Chem 284:22297–22309. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M109.014431 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 279. Mobley HL, Chippendale GR, Swihart KG, Welch RA. 1991. Cytotoxicity of the HpmA hemolysin and urease of Proteus mirabilis and Proteus vulgaris against cultured human renal proximal tubular epithelial cells. Infect Immun 59:2036–2042. doi: 10.1128/iai.59.6.2036-2042.1991 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 280. Welch RA. 1987. Identification of two different hemolysin determinants in uropathogenic Proteus isolates. Infect Immun 55:2183–2190. doi: 10.1128/iai.55.9.2183-2190.1987 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 281. Serwecinska L, Pytlos M, Lukomski S, Jaworski A, Rózalski A. 1997. The simultaneous production of both Hly- and Hpm-like hemolysins is characteristic of the Proteus penneri species. J Basic Microbiol 37:361–370. doi: 10.1002/jobm.3620370509 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 282. Burall LS, Harro JM, Li X, Lockatell CV, Himpsl SD, Hebel JR, Johnson DE, Mobley HLT. 2004. Proteus mirabilis genes that contribute to pathogenesis of urinary tract infection: identification of 25 signature-tagged mutants attenuated at least 100-fold. Infect Immun 72:2922–2938. doi: 10.1128/IAI.72.5.2922-2938.2004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 283. Himpsl SD, Lockatell CV, Hebel JR, Johnson DE, Mobley HLT. 2008. Identification of virulence determinants in uropathogenic Proteus mirabilis using signature-tagged mutagenesis. J Med Microbiol 57:1068–1078. doi: 10.1099/jmm.0.2008/002071-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 284. Zhao H, Li X, Johnson DE, Mobley HLT. 1999. Identification of protease and rpoN-associated genes of uropathogenic Proteus mirabilis by negative selection in a mouse model of ascending urinary tract infection. Microbiology (Reading) 145 (Pt 1):185–195. doi: 10.1099/13500872-145-1-185 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 285. Alamuri P, Mobley HLT. 2008. A novel autotransporter of uropathogenic Proteus mirabilis is both a cytotoxin and an agglutinin. Mol Microbiol 68:997–1017. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2958.2008.06199.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 286. Almogren A, Senior BW, Loomes LM, Kerr MA. 2003. Structural and functional consequences of cleavage of human secretory and human serum immunoglobulin A1 by proteinases from Proteus mirabilis and Neisseria meningitidis. Infect Immun 71:3349–3356. doi: 10.1128/IAI.71.6.3349-3356.2003 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 287. Loomes LM, Senior BW, Kerr MA. 1990. A proteolytic enzyme secreted by Proteus mirabilis degrades immunoglobulins of the immunoglobulin A1 (IgA1), IgA2, and IgG isotypes. Infect Immun 58:1979–1985. doi: 10.1128/iai.58.6.1979-1985.1990 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 288. Senior BW, Albrechtsen M, Kerr MA. 1988. A survey of IgA protease production among clinical isolates of Proteeae. J Med Microbiol 25:27–31. doi: 10.1099/00222615-25-1-27 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 289. Senior BW, Albrechtsen M, Kerr MA. 1987. Proteus mirabilis strains of diverse type have IgA protease activity. J Med Microbiol 24:175–180. doi: 10.1099/00222615-24-2-175 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 290. Hagberg L, Engberg I, Freter R, Lam J, Olling S, Svanborg Edén C. 1983. Ascending, unobstructed urinary tract infection in mice caused by pyelonephritogenic Escherichia coli of human origin. Infect Immun 40:273–283. doi: 10.1128/iai.40.1.273-283.1983 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 291. Keane WF, Freedman LR. 1967. Experimental pyelonephritis. XIV. Pyelonephritis in normal mice produced by inoculation of E. coli into the bladder lumen during water diuresis. Yale J Biol Med 40:231–237. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 292. Sarkar SF, Gordon JS, Martin GB, Guttman DS. 2006. Comparative genomics of host-specific virulence in Pseudomonas syringae. Genetics 174:1041–1056. doi: 10.1534/genetics.106.060996 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 293. Mannion A, Shen Z, Fox JG. 2018. Comparative genomics analysis to differentiate metabolic and virulence gene potential in gastric versus enterohepatic Helicobacter species. BMC Genomics 19:830. doi: 10.1186/s12864-018-5171-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 294. Kachroo P, Eraso JM, Beres SB, Olsen RJ, Zhu L, Nasser W, Bernard PE, Cantu CC, Saavedra MO, Arredondo MJ, et al. 2019. Integrated analysis of population genomics, transcriptomics and virulence provides novel insights into Streptococcus pyogenes pathogenesis. Nat Genet 51:548–559. doi: 10.1038/s41588-018-0343-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 295. Schrevens S, Durandau E, Tran VDT, Sanglard D. 2022. Using in vivo transcriptomics and RNA enrichment to identify genes involved in virulence of Candida glabrata. Virulence 13:1285–1303. doi: 10.1080/21505594.2022.2095716 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 296. Mei J-M, Nourbakhsh F, Ford CW, Holden DW. 1997. Identification of Staphylococcus aureus virulence genes in a murine model of bacteraemia using signature-tagged mutagenesis. Mol Microbiol 26:399–407. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2958.1997.5911966.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 297. Gaillard JL, Berche P, Sansonetti P. 1986. Transposon mutagenesis as a tool to study the role of hemolysin in the virulence of Listeria monocytogenes. Infect Immun 52:50–55. doi: 10.1128/iai.52.1.50-55.1986 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 298. Perry RD. 1999. Signature-tagged mutagenesis and the hunt for virulence factors. Trends Microbiol 7:385–388; doi: 10.1016/s0966-842x(99)01582-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 299. Sharma K, Dhar N, Thacker VV, Simonet TM, Signorino-Gelo F, Knott GW, McKinney JD. 2021. Dynamic persistence of UPEC intracellular bacterial communities in a human bladder-chip model of urinary tract infection. Elife 10:e66481. doi: 10.7554/eLife.66481 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 300. Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Myers EW, Lipman DJ. 1990. Basic local alignment search tool. J Mol Biol 215:403–410. doi: 10.1016/S0022-2836(05)80360-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 301. Cosentino S, Voldby Larsen M, Møller Aarestrup F, Lund O. 2013. PathogenFinder--distinguishing friend from foe using bacterial whole genome sequence data. PLoS ONE 8:e77302. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0077302 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 302. Adesina T, Nwinyi O, De N, Omonigbehin E. 2018. First detection of Proteus cibarius sp. of clinical significance. IOP Publishing. , p 012001. doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/210/1/012001 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 303. Shaaban M, Elshaer SL, Abd El-Rahman OA. 2022. Prevalence of extended-spectrum β-lactamases, AmpC, and carbapenemases in Proteus mirabilis clinical isolates. BMC Microbiol 22:247. doi: 10.1186/s12866-022-02662-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 304. Winokur PL, Canton R, Casellas J-M, Legakis N. 2001. Variations in the prevalence of strains expressing an extended-spectrum beta-lactamase phenotype and characterization of isolates from Europe, the Americas, and the Western Pacific region. Clin Infect Dis 32 Suppl 2:S94–103. doi: 10.1086/320182 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 305. CLSI . 2024. Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. 34th ed. CLSI supplement M100. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute [Google Scholar]
- 306. Leclercq R, Cantón R, Brown DFJ, Giske CG, Heisig P, MacGowan AP, Mouton JW, Nordmann P, Rodloff AC, Rossolini GM, Soussy C-J, Steinbakk M, Winstanley TG, Kahlmeter G. 2013. EUCAST expert rules in antimicrobial susceptibility testing. Clin Microbiol Infect 19:141–160. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2011.03703.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 307. Shelenkov A, Petrova L, Fomina V, Zamyatin M, Mikhaylova Y, Akimkin V. 2020. Multidrug-Resistant Proteus mirabilis strain with cointegrate plasmid. Microorganisms 8:1775. doi: 10.3390/microorganisms8111775 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 308. Alam M, Bano N, Upadhyay TK, Binsuwaidan R, Alshammari N, Sharangi AB, Kaushal RS, Saeed M. 2022. Enzymatic activity and horizontal gene transfer of heavy metals and antibiotic resistant Proteus vulgaris from hospital wastewater: an insight. Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol 2022:3399137. doi: 10.1155/2022/3399137 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 309. Carattoli A. 2013. Plasmids and the spread of resistance. Int J Med Microbiol 303:298–304. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmm.2013.02.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 310. Mathers AJ, Peirano G, Pitout JDD. 2015. The role of epidemic resistance plasmids and international high-risk clones in the spread of multidrug-resistant Enterobacteriaceae. Clin Microbiol Rev 28:565–591. doi: 10.1128/CMR.00116-14 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 311. Martínez JL, Baquero F. 2002. Interactions among strategies associated with bacterial infection: pathogenicity, epidemicity, and antibiotic resistance. Clin Microbiol Rev 15:647–679. doi: 10.1128/CMR.15.4.647-679.2002 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 312. Babakhani S, Oloomi M. 2018. Transposons: the agents of antibiotic resistance in bacteria. J Basic Microbiol 58:905–917. doi: 10.1002/jobm.201800204 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 313. Hall RM, Collis CM. 1995. Mobile gene cassettes and integrons: capture and spread of genes by site‐specific recombination. Mol Microbiol 15:593–600. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2958.1995.tb02368.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 314. Partridge SR, Tsafnat G, Coiera E, Iredell JR. 2009. Gene cassettes and cassette arrays in mobile resistance integrons. FEMS Microbiol Rev 33:757–784. doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6976.2009.00175.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 315. Naas T, Benaoudia F, Massuard S, Nordmann P. 2000. Integron-located VEB-1 extended-spectrum beta-lactamase gene in a Proteus mirabilis clinical isolate from Vietnam. J Antimicrob Chemother 46:703–711. doi: 10.1093/jac/46.5.703 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 316. Apata DF. 2009. Antibiotic resistance in poultry. International J of Poultry Science 8:404–408. doi: 10.3923/ijps.2009.404.408 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 317. Carattoli A. 2009. Resistance plasmid families in Enterobacteriaceae. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 53:2227–2238. doi: 10.1128/AAC.01707-08 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 318. Igwe J, Onaolapo J, Dauda E, Oladipo H. 2013. Plasmid conjugation in E. coli and drug resistance. Niger J Biotechnol 26:41–49. [Google Scholar]
- 319. Lu J, Zhao K, Xie H, Li R, Zhou M. 2021. Identification and characterization of a novel SXT/R391 integrative and conjugative element in a Proteus mirabilis food isolate. Foodborne Pathog Dis 18:727–732. doi: 10.1089/fpd.2020.2886 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 320. Saliu E-M, Zentek J, Vahjen W. 2020. In vitro conjugation kinetics of AmpC, broad spectrum and extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli donors and various Enterobacteriaceae recipients. BMC Microbiol 20:133. doi: 10.1186/s12866-020-01787-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 321. Yigit H, Queenan AM, Anderson GJ, Domenech-Sanchez A, Biddle JW, Steward CD, Alberti S, Bush K, Tenover FC. 2001. Novel carbapenem-hydrolyzing beta-lactamase, KPC-1, from a carbapenem-resistant strain of Klebsiella pneumoniae. Antimicrob Agents Chemother (Bethesda) 45. doi: 10.1128/AAC.45.4.1151-1161.2001 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 322. Ahmed AM, Hussein AIA, Shimamoto T. 2007. Proteus mirabilis clinical isolate harbouring a new variant of Salmonella genomic island 1 containing the multiple antibiotic resistance region. J Antimicrob Chemother 59:184–190. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkl471 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 323. Poirel L, Naas T, Guibert M, Chaibi EB, Labia R, Nordmann P. 1999. Molecular and biochemical characterization of VEB-1, a novel class A extended-spectrum beta-lactamase encoded by an Escherichia coli integron gene. Antimicrob Agents Chemother (Bethesda) 43:573–581. doi: 10.1128/AAC.43.3.573 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 324. Karim A, Poirel L, Nagarajan S, Nordmann P. 2001. Plasmid-mediated extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (CTX-M-3 like) from India and gene association with insertion sequence ISEcp1. FEMS Microbiol Lett 201:237–241. doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6968.2001.tb10762.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 325. Wang M, Guo Q, Xu X, Wang X, Ye X, Wu S, Hooper DC, Wang M. 2009. New plasmid-mediated quinolone resistance gene, qnrC, found in a clinical isolate of Proteus mirabilis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother (Bethesda) 53:1892–1897. doi: 10.1128/AAC.01400-08 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 326. Poirel L, Cattoir V, Nordmann P. 2012. Plasmid-mediated quinolone resistance; interactions between human, animal, and environmental ecologies. Front Microbiol 3:24. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2012.00024 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 327. Datta N, Kontomichalou P. 1965. Penicillinase synthesis controlled by infectious R factors in Enterobacteriaceae. Nature 208:239–241. doi: 10.1038/208239a0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 328. Fursova NK, Astashkin EI, Knyazeva AI, Kartsev NN, Leonova ES, Ershova ON, Alexandrova IA, Kurdyumova NV, Sazikina SY, Volozhantsev NV, Svetoch EA, Dyatlov IA. 2015. The spread of bla OXA-48 and bla OXA-244 carbapenemase genes among Klebsiella pneumoniae, Proteus mirabilis and Enterobacter spp. isolated in Moscow, Russia. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob 14:46. doi: 10.1186/s12941-015-0108-y [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 329. Pagani L, Dell’Amico E, Migliavacca R, D’Andrea MM, Giacobone E, Amicosante G, Romero E, Rossolini GM. 2003. Multiple CTX-M-type extended-spectrum beta-lactamases in nosocomial isolates of Enterobacteriaceae from a hospital in northern Italy. J Clin Microbiol 41:4264–4269. doi: 10.1128/JCM.41.9.4264-4269.2003 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 330. de Champs C, Bonnet R, Sirot D, Chanal C, Sirot J. 2000. Clinical relevance of Proteus mirabilis in hospital patients: a two year survey. J Antimicrob Chemother 45:537–539. doi: 10.1093/jac/45.4.537 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 331. Mokracka J, Gruszczyńska B, Kaznowski A. 2012. Integrons, β-lactamase and qnr genes in multidrug resistant clinical isolates of Proteus mirabilis and P. vulgaris. APMIS 120:950–958. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0463.2012.02923.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 332. Schnabel EL, Jones AL. 1999. Distribution of tetracycline resistance genes and transposons among phylloplane bacteria in Michigan apple orchards. Appl Environ Microbiol 65:4898–4907. doi: 10.1128/AEM.65.11.4898-4907.1999 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 333. Mazel D, Dychinco B, Webb VA, Davies J. 2000. Antibiotic resistance in the ECOR collection: integrons and identification of a novel aad gene . Antimicrob Agents Chemother 44:1568–1574. doi: 10.1128/AAC.44.6.1568-1574.2000 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 334. Gupta K, Gupta A, Shrivastava D, Ph.D. Scholar, Jaipur National University, Jaipur, M.D. Medicine, Assistant Professor, Department of Medicine, Jaipur National University Institute of Medical Sciences and Research Centre, Jaipur, Senior Joint Director, School of Life Sciences, Jaipur National, University, Jaipur . 2017. The last resort antibiotics: carbapenems. IJAR 5:1410–1413. doi: 10.21474/IJAR01/3957 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 335. Cabral AB, Maciel MAV, Barros JF, Antunes MM, Lopes ACS. 2015. Detection of bla KPC-2 in Proteus mirabilis in Brazil. Rev Soc Bras Med Trop 48:94–95. doi: 10.1590/0037-8682-0152-2014 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 336. Sud IJ, Feingold DS. 1970. Mechanism of polymyxin B resistance in Proteus mirabilis . J Bacteriol 104:289–294. doi: 10.1128/jb.104.1.289-294.1970 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 337. Soman R, Bakthavatchalam YD, Nadarajan A, Dwarakanathan HT, Venkatasubramanian R, Veeraraghavan B. 2021. Is it time to move away from polymyxins?: evidence and alternatives. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 40:461–475. doi: 10.1007/s10096-020-04053-w [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 338. Tibbetts R, Frye JG, Marschall J, Warren D, Dunne W. 2008. Detection of KPC-2 in a clinical isolate of Proteus mirabilis and first reported description of carbapenemase resistance caused by a KPC beta-lactamase in P. mirabilis. J Clin Microbiol 46:3080–3083. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00979-08 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 339. Chaves L, Tomich LM, Salomão M, Leite GC, Ramos J, Martins RR, Rizek C, Neves P, Batista MV, Amigo U, Guimaraes T, Levin AS, Costa SF. 2017. High mortality of bloodstream infection outbreak caused by carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosa producing SPM-1 in a bone marrow transplant unit. J Med Microbiol 66:1722–1729. doi: 10.1099/jmm.0.000631 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 340. Chen L, Al Laham N, Chavda KD, Mediavilla JR, Jacobs MR, Bonomo RA, Kreiswirth BN. 2015. First report of an OXA-48-producing multidrug-resistant Proteus mirabilis strain from Gaza, Palestine. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 59:4305–4307. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00565-15 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 341. Naas T, Cuzon G, Villegas M-V, Lartigue M-F, Quinn JP, Nordmann P. 2008. Genetic structures at the origin of acquisition of the beta-lactamase bla KPC gene. Antimicrob Agents Chemother (Bethesda) 52:1257–1263. doi: 10.1128/AAC.01451-07 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 342. Galdadas I, Lovera S, Pérez-Hernández G, Barnes MD, Healy J, Afsharikho H, Woodford N, Bonomo RA, Gervasio FL, Haider S. 2018. Defining the architecture of KPC-2 carbapenemase: identifying allosteric networks to fight antibiotics resistance. Sci Rep 8:12916. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-31176-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 343. Alba J, Ishii Y, Thomson K, Moland ES, Yamaguchi K. 2005. Kinetics study of KPC-3, a plasmid-encoded class A carbapenem-hydrolyzing beta-lactamase. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 49:4760–4762. doi: 10.1128/AAC.49.11.4760-4762.2005 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 344. Shen P, Wei Z, Jiang Y, Du X, Ji S, Yu Y, Li L. 2009. Novel genetic environment of the carbapenem-hydrolyzing β-lactamase KPC-2 among Enterobacteriaceae in China. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 53:4333–4338. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00260-09 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 345. Yao Y, Falgenhauer L, Rezazadeh Y, Falgenhauer J, Group IS, Imirzalioglu C, Chakraborty T. 2024. Predominant transmission of KPC-2 carbapenemase in Germany by a unique IncN plasmid variant harboring a novel non-transposable element (NTE KPC -Y). Microbiol Spectr 12:e0256423. doi: 10.1128/spectrum.02564-23 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 346. Bonnet R, Marchandin H, Chanal C, Sirot D, Labia R, De Champs C, Jumas-Bilak E, Sirot J. 2002. Chromosome-encoded class D β-lactamase OXA-23 in Proteus mirabilis . Antimicrob Agents Chemother 46:2004–2006. doi: 10.1128/AAC.46.6.2004-2006.2002 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 347. Papagiannitsis CC, Miriagou V, Kotsakis SD, Tzelepi E, Vatopoulos AC, Petinaki E, Tzouvelekis LS. 2012. Characterization of a transmissible plasmid encoding VEB-1 and VIM-1 in Proteus mirabilis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 56:4024–4025. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00470-12 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 348. Dixon N, Fowler RC, Yoshizumi A, Horiyama T, Ishii Y, Harrison L, Geyer CN, Moland ES, Thomson K, Hanson ND. 2016. IMP-27, a unique metallo-β-lactamase identified in geographically distinct isolates of Proteus mirabilis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 60:6418–6421. doi: 10.1128/AAC.02945-15 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 349. Poirel L, Schrenzel J, Cherkaoui A, Bernabeu S, Renzi G, Nordmann P. 2011. Molecular analysis of NDM-1-producing enterobacterial isolates from Geneva, Switzerland. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 66:1730–1733. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkr174 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 350. Girlich D, Bonnin RA, Bogaerts P, Laveleye M, Huang DT, Dortet L, Glaser P, Glupczynski Y, Naas T. 2017. Chromosomal amplification of the bla OXA-58 carbapenemase gene in a Proteus mirabilis clinical isolate. Antimicrob Agents Chemother (Bethesda) 61:10–1128. doi: 10.1128/AAC.01697-16 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 351. Leulmi Z, Kandouli C, Mihoubi I, Benlabed K, Lezzar A, Rolain J-M. 2019. First report of blaOXA-24 carbapenemase gene, armA methyltransferase and aac(6′)-Ib-cr among multidrug-resistant clinical isolates of Proteus mirabilis in Algeria. J Glob Antimicrob Resist 16:125–129. doi: 10.1016/j.jgar.2018.08.019 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 352. Hamprecht A, Sattler J, Noster J, Stelzer Y, Fuchs F, Dorth V, Gatermann SG, Göttig S. 2023. Proteus mirabilis - analysis of a concealed source of carbapenemases and development of a diagnostic algorithm for detection. Clin Microbiol Infect 29:1198. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2023.05.032 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 353. Bou Zerdan M, Al Hassan S, Shaker W, El Hajjar R, Allam S, Bou Zerdan M, Naji A, Zeineddine N. 2022. Carbapenemase inhibitors: updates on developments in 2021. J Clin Med Res 14:251–259. doi: 10.14740/jocmr4764 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 354. Queenan AM, Bush K. 2007. Carbapenemases: the versatile beta-lactamases. Clin Microbiol Rev 20:440–458, doi: 10.1128/CMR.00001-07 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 355. Ito-Horiyama T, Ishii Y, Ito A, Sato T, Nakamura R, Fukuhara N, Tsuji M, Yamano Y, Yamaguchi K, Tateda K. 2016. Stability of novel siderophore cephalosporin S-649266 against clinically relevant carbapenemases. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 60:4384–4386. doi: 10.1128/AAC.03098-15 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 356. Leonard DA, Bonomo RA, Powers RA. 2013. Class D β-lactamases: a reappraisal after five decades. Acc Chem Res 46:2407–2415. doi: 10.1021/ar300327a [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 357. Poirel L, Naas T, Nordmann P. 2010. Diversity, epidemiology, and genetics of class D β-lactamases. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 54:24–38. doi: 10.1128/AAC.01512-08 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 358. Bush K, Jacoby GA. 2010. Updated functional classification of β-lactamases. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 54:969–976. doi: 10.1128/AAC.01009-09 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 359. Bonnin RA, Girlich D, Jousset AB, Gauthier L, Cuzon G, Bogaerts P, Haenni M, Madec J-Y, Couvé-Deacon E, Barraud O, Fortineau N, Glaser P, Glupczynski Y, Dortet L, Naas T. 2020. A single Proteus mirabilis lineage from human and animal sources: a hidden reservoir of OXA-23 or OXA-58 carbapenemases in Enterobacterales. Sci Rep 10:9160. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-66161-z [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 360. Österblad M, Karah N, Halkilahti J, Sarkkinen H, Uhlin BE, Jalava J. 2016. Rare detection of the Acinetobacter class D carbapenemase bla OXA-23 gene in Proteus mirabilis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother (Bethesda) 60:3243–3245. doi: 10.1128/AAC.03119-15 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 361. Lange F, Pfennigwerth N, Gerigk S, Gohlke F, Oberdorfer K, Purr I, Wohanka N, Roggenkamp A, Gatermann SG, Kaase M. 2017. Dissemination of blaOXA-58 in Proteus mirabilis isolates from Germany. J Antimicrob Chemother 72:1334–1339. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkw566 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 362. Girlich D, Bonnin RA, Dortet L, Naas T. 2020. Genetics of acquired antibiotic resistance genes in Proteus spp. Front Microbiol 11:256. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2020.00256 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 363. Sattler J, Noster J, Stelzer Y, Spille M, Schäfer S, Xanthopoulou K, Sommer J, Jantsch J, Peter S, Göttig S, Gatermann SG, Hamprecht A. 2024. OXA-48-like carbapenemases in Proteus mirabilis – novel genetic environments and a challenge for detection . Emerging Microbes & Infections 13:2353310. doi: 10.1080/22221751.2024.2353310 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 364. Wiskirchen DE, Nordmann P, Crandon JL, Nicolau DP. 2014. Efficacy of humanized carbapenem and ceftazidime regimens against Enterobacteriaceae producing OXA-48 carbapenemase in a murine infection model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 58:1678–1683. doi: 10.1128/AAC.01947-13 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 365. Greissl C, Saleh A, Hamprecht A. 2019. Rapid detection of OXA-48-like, KPC, NDM, and VIM carbapenemases in Enterobacterales by a new multiplex immunochromatographic test. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 38:331–335. doi: 10.1007/s10096-018-3432-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 366. Saleh A, Göttig S, Hamprecht AG. 2018. Multiplex immunochromatographic detection of OXA-48, KPC, and NDM carbapenemases: impact of inoculum, antibiotics, and agar. J Clin Microbiol 56:00050–18. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00050-18 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 367. Baeza LL, Pfennigwerth N, Greissl C, Göttig S, Saleh A, Stelzer Y, Gatermann SG, Hamprecht A. 2019. Comparison of five methods for detection of carbapenemases in Enterobacterales with proposal of a new algorithm. Clin Microbiol Infect 25:1286. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2019.03.003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 368. Kolenda C, Benoit R, Carricajo A, Bonnet R, Dauwalder O, Laurent F. 2018. Evaluation of the new multiplex immunochromatographic O.K.N.V. K-SeT assay for rapid detection of OXA-48-like, KPC, NDM, and VIM carbapenemases. J Clin Microbiol 56:01247–18. doi: 10.1128/JCM.01247-18 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 369. Noster J, Thelen P, Hamprecht A. 2021. Detection of multidrug-resistant Enterobacterales-from ESBLs to carbapenemases. Antibiotics (Basel) 10:1140. doi: 10.3390/antibiotics10091140 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 370. Ge S, Dong X, Zhou J, Ge S. 2013. Comparative evaluations on bio-treatment of hexavalent chromate by resting cells of Pseudochrobactrum sp. and Proteus sp. in wastewater. J Environ Manage 126:7–12. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.04.011 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 371. Rani A, Shouche YS, Goel R. 2008. Declination of copper toxicity in pigeon pea and soil system by growth-promoting Proteus vulgaris KNP3 strain. Curr Microbiol 57:78–82. doi: 10.1007/s00284-008-9156-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 372. Hassen A, Saidi N, Cherif M, Boudabous A. 1998. Resistance of environmental bacteria to heavy metals. Bioresour Technol 64:7–15. doi: 10.1016/S0960-8524(97)00161-2 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 373. Fernández-Delgado M, Contreras M, García-Amado MA, Gueneau P, Suárez P. 2007. Occurrence of Proteus mirabilis associated with two species of venezuelan oysters. Rev Inst Med Trop Sao Paulo 49:355–359. doi: 10.1590/s0036-46652007000600004 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 374. Barthakur M, Bezbaruah B. 1999. Plant beneficial effect of two strains of Proteus vulgaris isolated from tea plantations. Indian J Exp Biol 37:919–924. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 375. Kim H-K, Lee J-K, Kim H, Oh T-K. 1996. Characterization of an alkaline lipase from Proteus vulgaris K80 and the DNA sequence of the encoding gene. FEMS Microbiol Lett 135:117–121. doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6968.1996.tb07975.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 376. Whangsuk W, Sungkeeree P, Thiengmag S, Kerdwong J, Sallabhan R, Mongkolsuk S, Loprasert S. 2013. Gene cloning and characterization of a novel highly organic solvent tolerant lipase from Proteus sp. SW1 and its application for biodiesel production. Mol Biotechnol 53:55–62. doi: 10.1007/s12033-012-9518-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 377. Ibrahim ML, Ijah UJJ, Manga SB, Bilbis LS, Umar S. 2013. Production and partial characterization of biosurfactant produced by crude oil degrading bacteria. International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation 81:28–34. doi: 10.1016/j.ibiod.2012.11.012 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 378. Ke C-Y, Chen L-Y, Qin F-L, Sun W-J, Wang S-C, Zhang Q-Z, Zhang X-L. 2021. Biotreatment of oil sludge containing hydrocarbons by Proteus mirabilis SB. Environmental Technology & Innovation 23:101654. doi: 10.1016/j.eti.2021.101654 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 379. Mohite BV, Pawar SP, Morankar A. 2011. Isolation, selection and biodegradation profile of phenol degrading bacteria from oil contaminated soil. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 87:143–146. doi: 10.1007/s00128-011-0322-z [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 380. Foght J, April T, Biggar K, Aislabie J. 2001. Bioremediation of DDT-contaminated soils: a review. Bioremediat J 5:225–246. doi: 10.1080/20018891079302 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 381. Das AC, Chakravarty A, Sukul P, Mukherjee D. 1995. Insecticides: their effect on microorganisms and persistence in rice soil. Microbiol Res 150:187–194. doi: 10.1016/S0944-5013(11)80055-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 382. Das AC, Mukherjee D. 2000. Soil application of insecticides influences microorganisms and plant nutrients. Agric, Ecosyst Environ, Appl Soil Ecol 14:55–62. doi: 10.1016/S0929-1393(99)00042-6 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 383. Das AC, Chakravarty A, Sukul P, Mukherjee D. 2003. Influence and persistence of phorate and carbofuran insecticides on microorganisms in rice field. Chemosphere 53:1033–1037. doi: 10.1016/S0045-6535(03)00713-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 384. Chen KC, Huang WT, Wu JY, Houng JY. 1999. Microbial decolorization of azo dyes by Proteus mirabilis. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol 23:686–690. doi: 10.1038/sj.jim.2900689 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 385. Patil PS, Phugare SS, Kalyani DC, Surwase SN, Jadhav JP. 2012. Bioremediation perspective of navy blue RX–containing textile effluent by bacterial isolate. Bioremediat J 16:185–194. doi: 10.1080/10889868.2012.731441 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 386. Islam F, Yasmeen T, Riaz M, Arif MS, Ali S, Raza SH. 2014. Proteus mirabilis alleviates zinc toxicity by preventing oxidative stress in maize (Zea mays) plants. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 110:143–152. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2014.08.020 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 387. Billah M, Bano A. 2015. Role of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria in modulating the efficiency of poultry litter composting with rock phosphate and its effect on growth and yield of wheat. Waste Manag Res 33:63–72. doi: 10.1177/0734242X14559593 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]





