Table 1. Comparison of the cefotaxime resistance mechanism, MIC value, and D-MSBL assay results for 58 E. coli derived from the BCs tested.
| Isolate | Mechanism(s) of resistance | Phenotype | D-MSBL assay | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIC (mg/L) | Categorya | Category | ||
| 1E | CTX-M-1 | 8 | R | R |
| 2E | CTX-M-15 | ≥64 | R | R |
| 3E | CTX-M-15 | ≥64 | R | R |
| 4E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 5E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 6E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 7E | CTX-M-15, SHV-11, TEM-1 | ≥64 | R | S |
| 8E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 9E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 10E | CTX-M-1 | ≥64 | R | S |
| 11E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 12E | CTX-M-27 | ≥64 | R | R |
| 13E | CTX-M-15 | ≥64 | R | R |
| 14E | CTX-M-15 | ≥64 | R | R |
| 15E | CTX-M-27 | ≥64 | R | R |
| 16E | - | ≤1 | S | R |
| 17E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 18E | CTX-M-15 | ≥64 | R | R |
| 19E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 20E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 21E | CTX-M-15 | ≥64 | R | R |
| 22E | CTX-M-15 | ≥64 | R | R |
| 23E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 24E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 25E | CTX-M-15 | ≥64 | R | R |
| 26E | CTX-M-15 | 4 | R | R |
| 27E | CTX-M-15, TEM-1 | ≥64 | R | R |
| 28E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 29E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 30E | CTX-M-15 | ≥64 | R | R |
| 31E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 32E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 33E | CTX-M-15 | ≥64 | R | R |
| 34E | CTX-M-27 | ≥64 | R | R |
| 35E | CTX-M-15 | ≥64 | R | R |
| 36E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 37E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 38E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 39E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 40E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 41E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 42E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 43E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 44E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 45E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 46E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 47E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 48E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 49E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 50E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 51E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 52E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 53E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 54E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 55E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 56E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 57E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
| 58E | - | ≤1 | S | S |
aThe MIC-based category was assessed according to the EUCAST guidelines version 6.0 2016 (S, ≤1 mg/L; R, >2 mg/L).