Abstract
Introduction
In the last years the rapid expansion of multidrug-resistant A. baumannii strains have become a major health problem. Efflux pumps are a group of transport proteins that contribute to the development of antibiotic resistance. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of the efflux pump inhibitor carbonyl cyanide 3-chlorophenylhydrazone (CCCP) on the antimicrobial action of imipenem and cefepime on clinical strains of A. baumannii.
Materials and methods
A total of 49 non-duplicate clinical samples were collected during January through December of 2018 from patients hospitalized in the Hospital Regional Docente de Cajamarca. Of the 49 samples obtained, the confirmatory identification of A. baumannii was performed on 47 samples by molecular methods. The amplification of the blaOXA-51-like gene was carried out by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). The determination of the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) was calculated using the microdilution method in culture broth. The susceptibility to both antibiotics (cefepime and imipenem) was evaluated in the presence and absence of the inhibitor carbonyl cyanide 3-chlorophenylhydrazone (CCCP).
Results
A total of 47 strains of A. baumannii were isolated: 97.87% (46/47) were resistant to Imipenem, 2.13% (1/47) of them were classified as intermediate and none of these strains were susceptible. On the other hand, 51.06% (24/47) of isolates were resistant to cefepime; 19.15% (9/47) intermediate and 29.79% (14/47) susceptible. We considered a significant difference in antibiotic susceptibility if the MIC changed at least 4 dilutions, after the addition of the inhibitor. In the case of CCCP in addition to imipenem, 2.1% (1/47) had a significant change of 4 or more reductions in MIC, 59.6% (28/47) achieved a change equal or less than 3 dilutions and 17.0% (8/47) did not have any change. In the case of CCCP with cefepime the percentage of strains with the significant change of MIC was 8.5% (4/47). On the other hand, 53.2% (24/47) presented a reduction equal or less than 3 dilutions and 12.8% (6/47) did not show changes.
Conclusion
In conclusion, our results demonstrate that the use of CCCP may improve the antibiotic effect of imipenem and cefepime on clinical strains of A. baumannii. The relevance of this study is that it provides evidence that this efflux pump inhibitor may be an alternative treatment against multidrug-resistant A. baumannii.
Introduction
Acinetobacter baumannii is a gram-negative opportunistic pathogen that causes 2–10% of all hospital-acquired gram-negative infections [1]. This pathogen is implicated in a great variety of nosocomial infections, including respiratory tract, bloodstream and urinary tract infections, being ventilator-associated pneumonia and bloodstream infections the ones with the highest mortality rates [2]. Infections are more common in immunocompromised patients such as the elderly, patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) or undergoing undergoing major invasive procedures, moreover it has been associated with extended periods of hospital stay [1, 3]. The epidemiological importance of this pathogens is due to the devastating outcomes associated with the infection such as mortality rates as high as 50%, its ability to survive for prolonged periods in surfaces around the patients and the emergence of multidrug-resistant strains [3–5].
In the last years the rapid expansion of multidrug-resistant A. baumannii strains has raised the medical and scientific community attention. In fact, the World Health Organization (WHO) released a list of microorganisms for which the development of new antibiotics is urgently needed, including A. baumannii among the group of highest priority [5, 6]. Also, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) has considered this bacteria among the most important nosocomial infections worldwide, as it remains one of the most difficult to treat pathogens [7]. Previous studies from Latin America report that the prevalence of carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter spp. is one of the most rapidly increasing in the world. For example, between the years 2000 to 2009 there were no cases of carbapenem-resistant strains in Peru [8]; however, in year 2013 the prevalence was 78% [9].
The high rates of antibiotic resistance have been attributed to three main mechanisms developed by this pathogen: enzymes that inactivate antibiotics, alteration of the target sites of antibiotics and reduction of antibiotics entry to the target site [10]. Efflux pumps are a group of transport proteins that contribute to the latter mechanism by reducing the concentration of the antibiotic in the target site, thus generating less susceptibility of the bacteria to the compound [11]. The presence of efflux pumps contribute to the resistance towards different antibiotics class, particularly imipenem and tigecycline [12]. Given the importance of efflux pumps in the development of resistance mechanisms by A. baumannii, efflux pump inhibitors have been widely tested against this pathogen. One of these compounds is carbonyl cyanide 3-chlorophenylhydrazone (CCCP) an uncoupler of oxidative phosphorylation which disrupts the ionic gradient of bacterial membranes [13]. This inhibitor compound has been effectively used in addition to tigecycline to improve susceptibility to this antibiotic [14]. Due to the increasing rates of resistance of A. baumannii against cefepime and imipenem in the last years [15], the aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of the inhibitor carbonyl cyanide 3-chlorophenylhydrazone (CCCP) on the antimicrobial action of imipenem and cefepime on clinical strains of A. baumannii.
Materials and methods
Clinical samples and bacteria isolates
A total of 49 non-duplicate clinical samples were collected during January through December of 2018 from patients hospitalized in the Hospital Regional Docente de Cajamarca. The identification of A.baumannii was carried out by standard biochemical methods proposed by Bouvet and Grimont [16]. The bacteria isolated were later cultivated in 2mL of trypticase soy agar (TSA) and incubated at 37°C for 18–24 hours. The samples were transported to the molecular biology laboratory of the Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC), where bacterial isolates were reactivated. Of the 49 samples obtained, the confirmatory identification of A. baumannii was performed on 47 samples by molecular methods previously described [17].
Amplification of the blaOXA-51-like gene
After molecular identification, the amplification of the blaOXA-51-like gene was carried out by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Firstly, DNA extraction was performed using an in-house assay previously reported by Oh et al [18]. Primers and probes used for the molecular identification of the blaOXA-51-like gene were previously described by Hu et al. [19]. A commercial strain of A.baumannii (ATCC 19606) was used as a positive control. Samples were sent for sequencing in Macrogen (Seoul, Korea).
For the detection of genetic material we performed a real-time PCR assay using the LightCycler 2.0 (Roche Diagnostic, Basel, Switzerland). Conditions used were previously described by Yang et al. [20]: initial 10 minutes at 95 ° C, followed by 55 cycles consisting of: denaturation at 95 ° C for 5 seconds, hybridization at 60 ° C for 5 seconds and elongation at 72 ° C for 15 seconds. Subsequently, we proceeded with the melting curve protocol, which was applied under the conditions of 95 ° C for 20 seconds and then increase of 0.2 ° C / second were executed between 40 ° C to 85 ° C. Data acquisition was obtained during the hybridization stage and in each temperature increase of the melting curve.
Antibiotic susceptibility profile
The determination of the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) was calculated using the microdilution method in culture broth according to the guidelines established in the guide M07-A10 of the Clinical and Laboratory Standard Institute (CLSI) [21], using the following antibiotics: imipenem and cefepime. For the susceptibility assay two groups were formed, to which 240 μL of the bacterial inoculum was added in sterile 1.5 ml tubes. The inoculum was incubated in a shaker at 37 ° C for 18 hours. Posteriorly, the turbidity of the inoculum was adjusted to a 0.5 McFarland standard. One group received 48 μL of free water and the other group received 48 μL of inhibitor.
The antibiotics were serially diluted in Mueller-Hinton (MH) broth in 10 Falcon tubes of 15 mL, obtaining the following concentrations: 256 μg / ml, 128 μg / ml, 64 μg / ml, 32 μg / ml, 16 μg / ml, 8 μg / ml, 4 μg / ml, 2 μg / ml, 1 μg / ml, 0.5 μg / ml, and 0.25 μg / ml. For the experiment, 96-well microplates were used, 90 μl were of antibiotic dilution and 10 μl of bacterial inoculum were added to each well, with a final volume of 100μl. The plates were incubated at 37 ° C for 18 to 24 hours and, after that, the reading was carried out in a spectrophotometer with a 630mm filter.
According to the M100 guide of the CLSI 2020 [22], the cut-off values considered in this study for cefepime were: ≤ 8 (Sensitive), 16 (Intermediate), ≥ 32 (Resistant) and for imipenem: ≤ 2 (S), 4 (I), ≥ 8 (R). For the quality control of microdilution in broth for both antibiotics, Escherichia coli (ATCC® b 25922) and Pseudomona aeruginosa (ATCC® b 25922) were used.
Finally, the minimum inhibitory concentration was compared with the reference tables provided by the CLSI instructions M100 [22].
Addition of the efflux pump inhibitor: Carbonyl cyanide 3 chlorophenylhydrazone (CCCP)
The susceptibility to both antibiotics (cefepime and imipenem) was evaluated in the presence and absence of the inhibitor carbonyl cyanide 3-chlorophenylhydrazone (CCCP) (Sigma–Aldrich, St Louis, MO, USA). Firstly, antibiotics with a concentration ranging from 0.25 a 256 μg/ml was added to each plate containing Muller Hinton broth. After that, CCCP was added to the corresponding plate to a final volume of 100 μl. MIC for each antibiotics was calculated in the presence and absence of the inhibitor CCCP. A 4-fold or greater reduction in the MIC values after the addition of CCCP was considered as a criterion of significance, as proposed by previous authors [23–25]
Ethics statement
This study was approved by the Research Ethics Board of the Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas, Lima, Peru (Document N° CIE/257-10-19). All methods were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulation. This study was performed on clinical laboratory isolates. The authors had no contact or interaction with the patients. Personal information of the patients was not collected, to guarantee anonymity and confidentiality.
Results
A total of 49 clinical strains of A. baumannii were isolated from different hospitalized patients in the Hospital Regional de Cajamarca, of which 47 strains were identified by molecular methods. Table 1 shows the MIC for both antibiotics before and after the addition of the CCCP inhibitor. Based on the MICs obtained, the A. baumannii strains were classified as susceptible, intermediate, or resistant, according to the cut-off point established by the CLSI for both antibiotics [22]. It can be observed in Fig 1 the susceptibility and resistance patterns according to each antibiotic with and without addition of CCCP. Most of the isolates of A. baumannii were resistant to both antibiotics tested. Specifically, 97.87% (46/47) of strains were resistant to imipenem, 2.13% (1/47) of them were classified as intermediate and none of these strains were susceptible. On the other hand, 51.06% (24/47) of isolates were resistant to cefepime; 19.15% (9/47) intermediate and 29.79% (14/47) susceptible. With the addition of CCCP it can be observed that resistance patterns changed. In the case of imipenem + CCCP (43/47) were resistant, (2/47) intermediate and (2/47) susceptible. In the case of cefepime + CCCP, (16/47) were resistant, (11/47) intermediate and (20/47) susceptible.
Table 1. MIC values of cefepime and imipenem against isolated strains of A. baumannii with and without CCCP addition.
| Strain | MIC (μg/ml) for each antibiotic | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IMIPENEM | CEFEPIME | |||
| ABX | ABX+ CCCP | ABX | ABX + CCCP | |
| Acc1 | 32 (R) | 64 (R) | 16 (I) | 8 (S) |
| Acc2 | 64 (R) | 128 (R) | 128 (R) | ≥256 (R) |
| Acc3 | 128 (R) | 64 (R) | 32 (R) | ≥256 (R) |
| Acc4 | 64 (R) | 32 (R) | 8 (S) | 16 (I) |
| Acc5 | 64 (R) | 8 (R) | 64 (R) | 8 (S) |
| Acc6 | 128 (R) | 128 (R) | 64 (R) | 128 (R) |
| Acc7 | 64 (R) | 128 (R) | 2 (S) | 8 (S) |
| Acc8 | 64 (R) | 64 (R) | 16 (I) | 4 (S) |
| Acc9 | 64 (R) | 32 (R) | 64 (R) | 16 (I) |
| Acc10 | 64 (R) | 32 (R) | 128 (R) | ≥256 (R) |
| Acc11 | 64 (R) | 128 (R) | 64 (R) | 16 (I) |
| Acc12 | 32 (R) | 8 (R) | 128 (R) | 16 (I) |
| Acc13 | 32 (R) | 8 (R) | 32 (R) | 8 (S) |
| Acc14 | 64 (R) | 32 (R) | 64 (R) | 16 (I) |
| Acc15 | 128 (R) | 32 (R) | 64 (R) | 16 (I) |
| Acc16 | 16 (R) | 32 (R) | 64 (R) | 4 (S) |
| Acc17 | 16 (R) | 32 (R) | 8 (S) | 16 (I) |
| Acc18 | 64 (R) | 16 (R) | 16 (R) | 4 (S) |
| Acc19 | 128 (R) | 64 (R) | ≥256 (R) | 128 (R) |
| Acc20 | 16 (R) | 64 (R) | 64 (R) | 64 (R) |
| Acc21 | 8 (R) | 4 (I) | 64 (R) | 64 (R) |
| Acc22 | 32 (R) | 8 (R) | 16 (I) | 64 (R) |
| Acc23 | 64 (R) | 32 (R) | 32 (R) | 8 (S) |
| Acc24 | 4 (I) | 0.25(S) | 64 (S) | 0.25 (S) |
| Acc25 | 64 (R) | 16 (R) | 8 (S) | 2 (S) |
| Acc26 | 128 (R) | 128 (R) | 4 (S) | 2 (S) |
| Acc27 | 64 (R) | 16 (R) | 2 (S) | 0.5 (S) |
| Acc28 | 64 (R) | 32 (R) | 64 (R) | 64 (R) |
| Acc29 | 64 (R) | 128 (R) | 8(S) | 64 (R) |
| Acc30 | 32 (R) | 64 (R) | 128 (R) | 64 (R) |
| Acc32 | 64 (R) | 64 (R) | 8 (S) | 1 (S) |
| Acc33 | 64 (R) | 64 (R) | 16 (I) | 8 (S) |
| Acc34 | 64 (R) | 32 (R) | 64 (R) | 2 (S) |
| Acc35 | 64 (R) | 32 (R) | 2 (S) | 4 (S) |
| Acc36 | 64 (R) | 16 (R) | 8 (S) | 2 (S) |
| Acc37 | 16 (R) | 16 (R) | 4 (S) | 64 (R) |
| Acc38 | 16 (R) | 2 (S) | 64 (R) | 128 (R) |
| Acc39 | 16 (R) | 32 (R) | 16 (I) | 16 (I) |
| Acc41 | 128 (R) | 32 (R) | 128 (R) | 16 (I) |
| Acc42 | 64 (R) | 32 (R) | 32 (R) | 32 (R) |
| Acc43 | 64 (R) | 32 (R) | 8 (S) | 0.25 (S) |
| Acc44 | 64 (R) | 64 (R) | 16 (I) | 4 (S) |
| Acc45 | 64 (R) | 8 (R) | 64 (R) | 16 (I) |
| Acc46 | 64 (R) | 16 (R) | 16 (I) | 16 (I) |
| Acc47 | 64 (R) | 32 (R) | 16 (I) | 64 (R) |
| Acc48 | 32 (R) | 4 (I) | 16 (I) | 8 (S) |
| Acc49 | 32 (R) | 32 (R) | 8 (S) | 2 (S) |
MIC: Minimum inhibitory concentration.
Acc1-49: A.Baumannii clinical strains, Acc31 and Acc40 were excluded.
(R):Resistant; (I):Intermediate; (S):Susceptible; N/C: no changes.
ABX: Antibiotic.
CCCP: Inhibidor Carbonyl Cyanide m-Chlorophenylhydrazone.
Fig 1. Antibiotic susceptibility pattern for each antibiotic before and after addition of CCCP.
Our comparative analysis shows that the addition of the inhibitor decreased the MIC of imipenem and cefepime as shown in Fig 2. A fourfold or greater reduction in the MIC was used as the criterion for significance. In the case of CCCP in addition to imipenem, 2.1% (1/47) had a significant change of 4 or more reductions in MIC, 59.6% (28/47) achieved a change equal or less than 3 dilutions and 17.0% (8/47) did not have any change. In the case of CCCP with cefepime the percentage of strains with the significant change of MIC was 8.5% (4/47). On the other hand, 53.2% (24/47) presented a reduction equal or less than 3 dilutions and 12.8% (6/47) did not show changes.
Fig 2. Reductions in MIC concentration for each antibiotic in combination with the CCCP inhibitor.
Discussion
In early 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) published a list of the ten most serious threats to public health, including antibiotic resistance as one of the most important among them [6]. Acinetobacter baumannii is a gram-negative coccobacillus implicated in a variety nosocomial infections, with increasing rates of antibiotic resistance. Its ability to survive during long periods of time in hospital settings and its resistance to different antibiotic classes are the main factors implicated in outbreaks caused by this pathogen. This can be observed in our study, in which we found high rates of antibiotic resistance among the 47 samples isolated from the Hospital Regional Docente de Cajamarca, with 46 strains resistant to imipenem and 24 to cefepime.
Efflux pumps are one of the most important mechanisms of antibiotic resistance displayed by Acinetobacter baumannii. The overexpression of efflux pumps are associated with a decreased concentration of antibiotics at their target site and an increase in the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) [26]. The inadequate use of antibiotics may contribute to the development of efflux pumps and reduce available treatment options [27]. Moreover, antibiotics abuse may be considered one of the most important factors inducing mulidrug-resistance in A. baumannii. In the current study 97.87% of the strains were resistant to imipenem and 51.06% to cefepime. Gholami et al [23] established that resistance rates of A. baumannii strains of hospitalized patients in Iran were between 76% to 100% according to the antibiotic tested, nonetheless, all strains were susceptible to colistin. In this study rates of resistance to cefepime and imipenem were 100% and 97%, respectively. There are previous studies in Peru reporting resistance rates of A. baumannii to different antibiotics. Similar to our study, Levy-Blitchtein et al. [28] demonstrated that 97.5% of A. baumannii strains isolated in a hospital in Lima, Peru were resistant to carbapenems. In the year 2002, the National Institute of Health of Peru found that resistance rates for A. baumannii were the highest for amikacin and ceftazidime, and the lowest for carbapenems [29]. Another study performed in Peru by García Rivera et al. [30] evidenced that 93% of strains were resistant to cefepime and 95% to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole.
The role of efflux pumps in biofilm formation and antibiotic resistance has been greatly studied in gram negative pathogens. These pathogens are the most common causes of nosocomial infections, resulting from their inherent ability to develop resistance, and are rapidly becoming one of the greatest challenges in modern medicine. The presence of efflux pumps has rendered a variety of bactericides ineffective against A. baumannii [31]. For example, it has been reported that the presence of efflux pumps corresponding to the resistance-nodulation-cell division (RND) family are an important in resistance to several antibiotic families, including beta-lactams, chloramphenicol, carbapenems, macrolides, tetracyclines, and aminoglycosides [32].
The development of efflux pumps inhibitors constitutes an important advance in the fight against antibiotic resistance. In the current study we could observe the effect of CCCP on susceptibility to imipenem and cefepime. In the case of imipenem, 46 and 43 strains were resistant before and after CCCP addition. In the case of cefepime, 24 and 16 were resistant before and after CCCP addition. It has been previously demonstrated that efflux pumps inhibitors decrease rates of multi-drug resistance in A. baumannii and other gram-negative bacteria [33, 34]. Particularly, the use of CCCP has been studied previously with optimal results, for example Rjamohan et al [35] reported that adding CCCP reduced the MIC of various biocides by 2 to 12 fold compared to their initial MIC. Likewise, another study performed by Lin et al [36] reported similar effects with the addition of CCCP to ciprofloxacin. In our study, the addition of the CCCP inhibitor decreased resistance in 11 clinical strains. We could observe that initially 0 and 14 strains were susceptible to imipenem and cefepime, respectively. After the use of CCCP in combination with the antibiotics, 2 and 20 strains were susceptible to imipenem and cefepime, respectively.
We observed that only 1 (2.1%) strain achieved the fourfold or greater reduction in MIC for imipenem and 4 (8.5%) strains for cefepime. More than 50% of the strains reduced their MIC by 2–3 dilutions for both drugs. Interestingly, approximately 20% of the strains increased their MIC for both antibiotics by 2–3 dilutions. Other studies report greater reductions in MIC with the use of efflux pumps inhibitors. For example, Gholami et al [23] report that the use of Phenylalanine-Arginine β-Naphthylamide (PAβN) resulted in a 4–64 fold reduction in the MIC for 58 of 60 (96.6%) isolates of A. baumannii. Similarly, Ardebili and colleagues [13] found that susceptibility of A. baumannii to ciprofloxacin was highly increased in the presence of CCCP, with 86.1% of their isolates showing MIC reductions by 2 to 64 dilutions. Our findings could be explained by the overall greater resistance at baseline found in our study, nearly all our isolates were resistant to imipenem and more than the half to cefepime. Also, efflux pumps are one of the mechanisms but not always the only mechanism of antibiotic resistance. Several mechanisms are involved in antibiotic resistance in A. baumannii, such as β-lactamases production, decreased membrane permeability and altered target site of the antibiotic [37–39]. In the present study, the susceptibility to imipenem and cefepime could be greatly affected by the presence of beta lactamases and imipenemases, which are not targeted by efflux pump inhibitors [38]. Finally, we observed a paradoxical effect in some isolates, with an increase in the MIC when CCCP was added. Similarly, Ferrer-Espada et al [40] found that the inhibitor PAβN resulted in a paradoxical effect on bacterial inhibition. This phenomenom has been described as the “Eagle effect”, which results in a paradoxical reduced killing of microorganisms by antibiotics at concentrations higher than their optimum bactericidal concentration [41].
The most important limitation of this study is the lack of information regarding medical records. It would be interesting to analyze the clinical information of the patients, including clinical status, co-morbidities and previous antibiotic use. Also, information of the origin of the samples (biopsies, tissues or secretions) would be essential.
In conclusion our results demonstrate that the use of CCCP may improve in vitro susceptibility of A. baumannii to imipenem and cefepime. The relevance of this study is that it provides evidence that this efflux pump inhibitor may be used in combination with antibiotic therapy, given that pathogens such as A. baumannii develop intrinsic resistance mechanisms that have rendered most antimicrobial treatments useless. Further studies are required to evaluate the effect of this inhibitor in combination with other antimicrobials, as well as, its effect against other microorganisms. Moreover, CCCP should be studied in the next years to evaluate its in vivo activity, as well as, possible adverse effects.
Acknowledgments
We thank the staff of the health network from la DIRESA Cajamarca and Hospital Regional Docente de Cajamarca, Cajamarca, Peru.
Data Availability
Abstraction format used in the study and dataset are available and accessible in the link: https://figshare.com/s/0527d8654784be2e7056".
Funding Statement
This work was supported by Dirección de Investigación, Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas, grant Nº B-016-2020-UPC, Lima-Peru. Include this sentence at the end of your statement: The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
References
- 1.Antunes LC, Visca P, Towner KJ. Acinetobacter baumannii: evolution of a global pathogen. Pathog Dis. 2014. Aug;71(3):292–301. doi: 10.1111/2049-632X.12125 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Yu K, Zhang Y, Xu W, Zhang X, Xu Y, Sun Y, et al. Hyper-expression of the efflux pump gene adeB was found in Acinetobacter baumannii with decreased triclosan susceptibility. J Glob Antimicrob Resist. 2020. Sep;22:367–373. doi: 10.1016/j.jgar.2020.02.027 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Chopra T, Marchaim D, Awali RA, et al. Epidemiology of bloodstream infections caused by Acinetobacter baumannii and impact of drug resistance to both carbapenems and ampicillin-sulbactam on clinical outcomes. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2013;57(12):6270–6275. doi: 10.1128/AAC.01520-13 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Marchaim D, Levit D, Zigron R, Gordon M, Lazarovitch T, Carrico JA, et al. Clinical and molecular epidemiology of Acinetobacter baumannii bloodstream infections in an endemic setting. Future Microbiol. 2017. Mar;12:271–283. doi: 10.2217/fmb-2016-0158 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Howard A, O’Donoghue M, Feeney A, Sleator RD. Acinetobacter baumannii: an emerging opportunistic pathogen. Virulence. 2012. May 1;3(3):243–50. doi: 10.4161/viru.19700 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Tacconelli E, Carrara E, Savoldi A, Harbarth S, Mendelson M, Monnet DL, et al. Discovery, research, and development of new antibiotics: the WHO priority list of antibiotic-resistant bacteria and tuberculosis. Lancet Infect Dis. 2018. Mar;18(3):318–327. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(17)30753-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Talbot GH, Bradley J, Edwards JE Jr, Gilbert D, Scheld M, Bartlett JG; Antimicrobial Availability Task Force of the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Bad bugs need drugs: an update on the development pipeline from the Antimicrobial Availability Task Force of the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2006. Mar 1;42(5):657–68. doi: 10.1086/499819 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Organización Panamericana de la Salud. Organización M de la S. Informe Anual de la red de monitore/vigilancia de la resistencia a los antibioticos. Vol. 38, Informe Anual de la red de monitore/vigilancia de la resistencia a los antibioticos. Lima, Peru; 2009.
- 9.Rodríguez CH, Nastro M, Famiglietti A. Carbapenemases in Acinetobacter baumannii. Review of their dissemination in Latin America. Rev Argent Microbiol. 2018. Jul 1;50(3):327–33. doi: 10.1016/j.ram.2017.10.006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Singh H, Thangaraj P, Chakrabarti A. Acinetobacter baumannii: A Brief Account of Mechanisms of Multidrug Resistance and Current and Future Therapeutic Management. J Clin Diagn Res. 2013;7(11):2602–2605. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2013/6337.3626 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Blanchard C, Barnett P, Perlmutter J, Dunman PM. Identification of Acinetobacter baumannii serum-associated antibiotic efflux pump inhibitors. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014. Nov;58(11):6360–70. doi: 10.1128/AAC.03535-14 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Lee CR, Lee JH, Park M, Park KS, Bae IK, Kim YB, et al. Biology of Acinetobacter baumannii: Pathogenesis, antibiotic resistance mechanisms, and prospective treatment options. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2017. Mar 13;7(MAR). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Ardebili A, Talebi M, Azimi L, Abdolaziz, Lari R, Lari AR. Effect of Efflux Pump Inhibitor Carbonyl Cyanide 3-Chlorophenylhydra-zone on the Minimum Inhibitory Concentration of Ciprofloxacin in Acineto-bacter baumannii Clinical Isolates. Jundishapur J Microbiol. 2014;7(1):8691. doi: 10.5812/jjm.8691 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Ardehali SH, Azimi T, Fallah F, Owrang M, Aghamohammadi N, Azimi L. Role of efflux pumps in reduced susceptibility to tigecycline in Acinetobacter baumannii. New Microbes New Infect. 2019. Jul 1;30. doi: 10.1016/j.nmni.2019.100547 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Alavi-Moghadam M. Incidence of imipenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii in a general intensive care unit (ICU). Vol. 5, Caspian J Intern Med. 2014. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
- 16.Bouvet PJM, Grimont PAD. Identification and biotyping of clinical isolates of Acinetobacter. Ann Inst Pasteur Microbiol. 1987. Sep 1;138(5):569–78. doi: 10.1016/0769-2609(87)90042-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Salazar de Vegasa EZ, Nieves B. Acinetobacter spp.: microbiological, clinical and epidemiological aspects. Rev la Soc Venez Microbiol. 2005;25(April):64–71. [Google Scholar]
- 18.Oh SY, Han JY, Lee SR, Lee HT. Improved DNA Extraction Method for Molecular Diagnosis from Smaller numbers of Cells. Korean J Clin Lab Sci. 2014;46(3):99–105. [Google Scholar]
- 19.Hu WS, Yao SM, Fung CP, Hsieh YP, Liu CP, Lin JF. An OXA-66/OXA-51-like carbapenemase and possibly an efflux pump are associated with resistance to imipenem in Acinetobacter baumannii. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2007;51(11):3844–3852. doi: 10.1128/AAC.01512-06 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Yang Q, Rui Y. Two Multiplex Real-Time PCR Assays to Detect and Differentiate Acinetobacter baumannii and Non- baumannii Acinetobacter spp. Carrying blaNDM, blaOXA-23-Like, blaOXA-40-Like, blaOXA-51-Like, and blaOXA-58-Like Genes. PLoS One. 2016. Jul 8;11(7):e0158958. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0158958 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. M07-A10 Methods for Dilution Antimicrobial Susceptibility Tests for Bacteria That Grow Aerobically; Approved Standard-Tenth Edition [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2020 Mar 31]. www.clsi.org.
- 22.Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing, 30th Edition [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2020 Mar 31]. http://em100.edaptivedocs.net/GetDoc.aspx?doc=CLSIM100ED30:2020&scope=user
- 23.Gholami M, Hashemi A, Hakemi-Vala M, Goudarzi H, Hallajzadeh M. Efflux Pump Inhibitor Phenylalanine-Arginine Β-Naphthylamide Effect on the Minimum Inhibitory Concentration of Imipenem in Acinetobacter baumannii Strains Isolated From Hospitalized Patients in Shahid Motahari Burn Hospital, Tehran, Iran. Jundishapur J Microbiol. 2015. Oct 12;8(10):e19048. doi: 10.5812/jjm.19048 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Valentine SC, Contreras D, Tan S, Real LJ, Chu S, Xu HH. Phenotypic and molecular characterization of Acinetobacter baumannii clinical isolates from nosocomial outbreaks in Los Angeles County, California. J Clin Microbiol. 2008. Aug;46(8):2499–507. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00367-08 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Pannek S, Higgins PG, Steinke P, Jonas D, Akova M, Bohnert JA, et al. Multidrug efflux inhibition in Acinetobacter baumannii: comparison between 1-(1-naphthylmethyl)-piperazine and phenyl-arginine-beta-naphthylamide. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2006. May;57(5):970–4. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkl081 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Vila J, Martí S, Sánchez-Céspedes J. Porins, efflux pumps and multidrug resistance in Acinetobacter baumannii. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2007;59(6):1210–5. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkl509 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Xie R, Zhang XD, Zhao Q, Peng B, Zheng J. Analysis of global prevalence of antibiotic resistance in Acinetobacter baumannii infections disclosed a faster increase in OECD countries. Emerg Microbes Infect. 2018. Mar 14;7(1):31. doi: 10.1038/s41426-018-0038-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Levy-Blitchtein S, Roca I, Plasencia-Rebata S, Vicente-Taboada W, Velásquez-Pomar J, Muñoz L, et al. Emergence and spread of carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii international clones II and III in Lima, Peru. Emerg Microbes Infect. 2018. Jul 4;7(1):119. doi: 10.1038/s41426-018-0127-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Carlos R, Farías B, Pérez Ponce LJ, Castro Vega G, Pujol Pérez M, Barletta Del Castillo JE, et al. Acinetobacter baumannii multirresistente: un reto para la terapéutica actual Multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii: a challange for current therapeutic. 2018.
- 30.Garcia- Rivera M, Ramírez R, Pereira M, Montes R, Gamarra. R., García-de-la-Guarda R. Infección nosocomial por Acinetobacter Baumannii resistentes a antimicrobianos en pacientes internados en un hospital de nivel IV, Lima–Perú. Lima; 2015.
- 31.Reza A, Mark Sutton J, Rahman KM. Effectiveness of efflux pump inhibitors as biofilm disruptors and resistance breakers in gram- negative (ESKAPEE) bacteria. Antibiotics. 2019;8(4). doi: 10.3390/antibiotics8040229 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Coyne S, Courvalin P, Périchon B. Efflux-Mediated Antibiotic Resistance in Acinetobacter spp. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2011;55(3):947–53. doi: 10.1128/AAC.01388-10 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Zechini B, Versace I. Inhibitors of Multidrug Resistant Efflux Systems in Bacteria. Recent Pat Antiinfect Drug Discov. 2009. Jan 21;4(1):37–50. doi: 10.2174/157489109787236256 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Park S, Lee KM, Yoo YS, Yoo JS, Yoo J Il, Kim HS, et al. Alterations of gyrA, gyrB, and parC and Activity of Efflux Pump in Fluoroquinolone-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii. Osong Public Heal Res Perspect. 2011. Dec;2(3):164–70. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Rajamohan G, Srinivasan VB, Gebreyes WA. Novel role of Acinetobacter baumannii RND efflux transporters in mediating decreased susceptibility to biocides. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2010. Feb;65(2):228–32. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkp427 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Lin L, Ling BD, Li XZ. Distribution of the multidrug efflux pump genes, adeABC, adeDE and adeIJK, and class 1 integron genes in multiple-antimicrobial-resistant clinical isolates of Acinetobacter baumannii-Acinetobacter calcoaceticus complex. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2009. Jan;33(1):27–32. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2008.06.027 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Sharma A, Gupta VK, Pathania R. Efflux pump inhibitors for bacterial pathogens: From bench to bedside. Indian J Med Res. 2019. Feb;149(2):129–145. doi: 10.4103/ijmr.IJMR_2079_17 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Vrancianu CO, Gheorghe I, Czobor IB, Chifiriuc MC. Antibiotic Resistance Profiles, Molecular Mechanisms and Innovative Treatment Strategies of Acinetobacter baumannii. Microorganisms. 2020;8(6):935. doi: 10.3390/microorganisms8060935 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Impey RE, Hawkins DA, Sutton JM, Soares da Costa TP. Overcoming Intrinsic and Acquired Resistance Mechanisms Associated with the Cell Wall of Gram-Negative Bacteria. Antibiotics (Basel). 2020. Sep 19;9(9):623. doi: 10.3390/antibiotics9090623 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Ferrer-Espada R, Shahrour H, Pitts B, Stewart PS, Sánchez-Gómez S, Martínez-de-Tejada G. A permeability-increasing drug synergizes with bacterial efflux pump inhibitors and restores susceptibility to antibiotics in multi-drug resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa strains. Sci Rep. 2019. Mar 5;9(1):3452. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-39659-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Prasetyoputri A, Jarrad AM, Cooper MA, Blaskovich MAT. The Eagle Effect and Antibiotic-Induced Persistence: Two Sides of the Same Coin? Trends Microbiol. 2019. Apr;27(4):339–354. doi: 10.1016/j.tim.2018.10.007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
Abstraction format used in the study and dataset are available and accessible in the link: https://figshare.com/s/0527d8654784be2e7056".