Abstract
OBJECTIVE.
The major mechanism of fluoroquinolone (FQ) resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PSA) is modification of target proteins in DNA gyrase and topoisomerase IV, most commonly the gyrA and parC subunits. The objective of this study was to determine risk factors for PSA with and without gyrA or parC mutations.
DESIGN.
Case-case-control study
SETTING.
Two adult academic acute-care hospitals
PATIENTS.
Case 1 study participants had a PSA isolate on hospital day 3 or later with any gyrA or parC mutation; case 2 study participants had a PSA isolate on hospital day 3 or later without these mutations. Controls were a random sample of all inpatients with a stay of 3 days or more.
METHODS.
Each case group was compared to the control group in separate multivariate models on the basis of demographics and inpatient antibiotic exposure, and risk factors were qualitatively compared.
RESULTS.
Of 298 PSA isolates, 172 (57.7%) had at least 1 mutation. Exposure to vancomycin and other agents with extended Gram-positive activity was a risk factor for both cases (case 1 odds ratio [OR], 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04–1.13; OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.03–1.26; case 2 OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.03–1.14; OR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.01–1.25, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS.
Exposure to agents with extended Gram-positive activity is a risk factor for isolation of PSA overall but not for gyrA/parC mutations. FQ exposure is not associated with isolation of PSA with mutations.
Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PSA) is an important pathogen that accounts for ~10% of healthcare-acquired infections.1 It has multiple intrinsic and acquired resistance mechanisms that may confer resistance to all available antibiotic therapies.2 Infection with antibiotic-resistant PSA results in higher mortality, longer length of hospital stay, and higher healthcare costs.3–5 Rates of resistance to fluoroquinolones (FQs) in PSA are significant, with reported rates of ≤35%.6 The mechanism of action of FQs involves binding to and inhibiting the activity of the type II topoisomerases, specifically DNA gyrase and topoisomerase IV. A major mechanism of FQ resistance is modification of target proteins in DNA gyrase and topoisomerase IV, most commonly in the gyrA and parC subunits, respectively.7,8 It has been shown that, while a small number of mutations may not result in phenotypic resistance, the addition of subsequent mutations will eventually give rise to full resistance to FQs.9,10
Risk factors for phenotypic resistance to FQs in PSA have previously been studied, comparing patients with FQ-resistant PSA to those with FQ-susceptible PSA.11–15 Prior FQ use has been identified as a risk factor in these studies. However, risk factors for specific FQ resistance mechanisms in PSA may differ from those for phenotypic resistance and have not yet been studied. Identification of the risk factors associated with the presence of specific FQ resistance mechanisms will lead to an improved understanding of the early steps in the development of resistance in PSA and of the modifiable variables at which interventions can be targeted to prevent the emergence of resistance. Therefore, the objective of this study was to identify risk factors associated with gyrA and parC mutations in PSA with a focus on prior antibiotic exposure.
METHODS
Study Design and Study Participants
This study was conducted at 2 academic adult acute-care hospitals within the University of Pennsylvania Health System, the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania (HUP), a 782-bed quaternary care center, and Penn Presbyterian Medical Center (PPMC), a 331-bed urban community hospital, from May 23, 2008, through November 10, 2009. To identify the risk factors associated with gyrA and parC mutations, we conducted a case-case-control study, in which 2 parallel case-control studies were conducted using the same control group.16
Eligible patients were identified through the HUP Clinical Microbiology Laboratory, which processes and cultures all samples from both hospitals. Patients hospitalized at HUP or PPMC with a first clinical PSA isolate on hospital day 3 or later during the study period were eligible for inclusion in the study. Day 3 was chosen to optimize capture of nosocomially acquired PSA. All eligible patients were included and each study participant was included only once. The presence of mutations in gyrA and parC was then determined using PCR amplification and sequencing. The cases for the first case-control study (case 1) were defined as those patients with a PSA clinical isolate in which any mutation in gyrA or parC was identified. These patients were compared to a 10% random sample of all patients hospitalized during the same period for at least 3 days without PSA isolated in a clinical culture. The cases for the second case-control study (case 2) were defined as those patients with a PSA clinical isolate in which no mutations in gyrA or parC were identified. These study participants were compared to the same control group.
This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University of Pennsylvania. A waiver of informed consent was obtained.
Data Collection
Data on the primary exposure of interest and potential confounding variables were ascertained through The Pennsylvania Integrated Clinical and Research Database, which includes demographic, pharmacy, laboratory and billing information and has been used successfully in prior studies of antibiotic resistance.11,17
The primary exposure of interest was antibiotic use (with a focus on FQ use) during the current admission. Antibiotics were grouped in the following categories: FQs (ie, ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, moxifloxacin), aminoglycosides (ie, gentamicin, tobramycin, amikacin), antipseudomonal cephalosporins (ie, cefepime and ceftazidime), other cephalosporins (eg, ceftriaxone, cefuroxime, cefazolin), antipseudomonal penicillins (ie, piperacillin with or without tazobactam), other penicillins (eg, oxacillin, amoxicillin, ampicillin), carbapenems (ie, imipenem-cilastatin and meropenem), sulfonamides (ie, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, also known as co-trimoxazole), tetracyclines (doxycycline), macrolides (ie, azithromycin, clarithromycin), monobactams (aztreonam), vancomycin, primary anti-anaerobic agents (ie, metronidazole and clindamycin), and other extended spectrum Gram-positive agents (ie, linezolid, daptomycin, quinopristin-dalfopristin). Antibiotic exposure was calculated as antibiotic days (ie, days count separately for each antimicrobial category). Data on potential confounders were ascertained on the day of admission. The following data elements were collected on all study participants: age, gender, race/ethnicity, comorbidities (using the Elixhauser Comorbidity index18), illness severity and risk of mortality (using the All-Patient Refined Diagnosis Related Groups subclass scores19–21), and time at risk. Time at risk was defined as the number of days from admission to a clinical culture positive for PSA in the case groups and the number of days from admission to discharge in the control group.
Laboratory Testing
Antimicrobial susceptibility testing of PSA was performed using the Vitek2 system (bioMerieux Inc., Durham, NC) and interpreted using Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute breakpoints. 22 gyrA and parC genes were amplified by PCR using primers described by Gorgani et al.23 PCR products were cleaned and submitted to the University of Pennsylvania DNA Sequencing Facility for Sanger sequencing.24 DNA sequences were then analyzed using Lasergene software (DNASTAR, Madison, WI).
Data Analysis
Analyses were conducted separately for each case-control study. The results of the final models were then qualitatively compared.
For each study, bivariable analyses were conducted to evaluate the association between exposure and potential confounding variables and the outcomes (ie, isolation of PSA with gyrA or parC mutations [case 1] or isolation of PSA without gyrA or parC mutations [case 2]). The t test or Wilcoxon rank sum test was used for continuous variables, and the χ2 or Fisher exact test was used for categorical variables, as appropriate.
Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) were calculated using multivariate logistic regression. The first multivariate model identified independent risk factors for isolation of PSA with gyrA or parC mutations; the second multivariate model identified independent risk factors for isolation of PSA without gyrA or parC mutations. Days of FQ use, time at risk, and illness severity score were included in the final models. Other antibiotic and non-antibiotic independent variables with a P < .20 in bivariate analyses were initially included in the models,25 and were maintained in the final models if they remained significantly associated with the outcome using backward selection.26
For all calculations, a 2-tailed P < .05 was considered significant. All statistical calculations were performed using commercially available software (SAS 9.3, SAS Institute Inc., Cary, North Carolina, USA).
RESULTS
A total of 398 PSA isolates were identified during the study period; of these, 37 (9.3%) showed phenotypic resistance to levofloxacin (used as a marker of FQ resistance) and 361 (90.7%) did not. Of the 398 isolates, we were able to completely sequence the 3 mutations for parC and 6 mutations in the gyrA subunit in 298 (79.4%). A total of 298 isolates comprised the study cohort. A total of 45,644 patients met eligibility criteria to be included in the control group; a sample of 4,564 patients (10%) was randomly selected as the controls for the 2 case groups.
Table 1 shows the number and type of mutations identified in the isolates. A total of 172 (57.7%) isolates had at least 1 mutation in gyrA or parC whereas 126 (42.3%) had no mutations. In regard to mutations in specific subunits, 106 (35.6%) had mutations in gyrA only, 15 (5.0%) had mutations in parC only, and 51 (17.1%) had mutations in both gyrA and parC subunits. Of isolates with at least 1 mutation, 34 (19.8%) showed phenotypic resistance to FQs, while only 2 (1.6%) of those without mutations were resistant to FQs.
TABLE 1.
gyrA and parC Mutations in P. aeruginosa Isolates
| Mutation | No. of Isolates (%) |
|---|---|
| gyrA mutations only | 106 (35.6) |
| parC mutations only | 15 (5.0) |
| gyrA and parC mutations | 51 (17.1) |
| gyrA mutations | |
| None | 141 (47.3) |
| 1 | 124 (41.6) |
| 2 | 22 (7.4) |
| 3 | 4 (1.3) |
| 4 | 7 (2.4) |
| parC mutations | |
| None | 232 (77.9) |
| 1 | 60 (20.1) |
| 2 | 6 (2.0) |
The first case-control study examined risk factors for isolation of PSA with at least 1 mutation in gyrA or parC (case 1). Results of bivariate analysis for this study are shown in Table 2 and Table 3. Compared to controls without PSA, study participants with PSA with at least 1 mutation had significantly higher comorbidity scores (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.14–1.21; P < .001), higher illness severity scores (OR, 6.91; 95% CI, 5.39–8.85; P < .001), and longer time at risk (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.06–1.09; P < .001) than controls. As shown in Table 3, most antibiotic classes (given as odds of exposure per day) were significantly associated with isolation of PSA with at least 1 gyrA or parC mutation on bivariate analysis.
TABLE 2.
Unadjusted Association Between Baseline Characteristics and Isolation of P. aeruginosa Isolates with Any gyrA or parC Mutations
| Risk Factor | Isolates with Mutations (N = 172) | Control Group (N = 4,564) | OR (95% CI) | P Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean age, y (SD) | 62.3 (15.3) | 54.0 (19.4) | 1.02 (1.02–1.03) | <.001 |
| Male sex, no. (%) | 93 (54.1) | 2,006 (44.0) | 1.50 (1.11–2.04) | .009 |
| Race, no. (%) | ||||
| Black/African-American | 56 (32.6) | 1,901 (41.6) | 0.68 (0.49–0.94) | .02 |
| White | 103 (60.0) | 2,404 (52.7) | ||
| Other | 13 (7.6) | 259 (5.7) | ||
| Hospital, no. (%) | ||||
| PPMC | 45 (26.2) | 1,246 (27.3) | 1.00 (reference) | Reference |
| HUP | 127 (73.8) | 3,318 (72.7) | 1.06 (0.75–1.50) | .74 |
| Mean Elixhauser comorbidity index score (SD) | 3.74 (4.41) | 0.84 (3.04) | 1.18 (1.14–1.21) | <.001 |
| APR-DRG severity of illness score subgroup, no. (%) | 6.91 (5.39–8.85) | <.001 | ||
| Mild | 1 (0.6) | 1,314 (28.8) | ||
| Moderate | 12 (7.0) | 1,702 (37.3) | ||
| Major | 42 (24.4) | 1,135 (24.9) | ||
| Extreme | 117 (68.0) | 411 (9.0) | ||
| Mean time at risk (SD) | 19.1 (34.4) | 5.7 (6.4) | 1.08 (1.06, 1.09) | <.001 |
note. OR, odds ratio; CI: 95% confidence interval; SD, standard deviation; HUP, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania; PPMC, Penn Presbyterian Medical Center; APR-DRG, All Patient Refined Diagnosis Related Groups.
TABLE 3.
Unadjusted Association Between Antibiotic Exposure and Isolation of P. aeruginosa with Any gyrA or parC Mutations
| Mean Antibiotic Days (SD) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Antibiotic Class | Cases | Controls | ORa (95% CI) | P Value |
| Aminoglycosides | 0.49 (1.83) | 0.16 (0.76) | 1.22 (1.11–1.34) | <.001 |
| Fluoroquinolones | 0.51 (1.31) | 0.32 (1.37) | 1.07 (0.99–1.16) | .08 |
| Antipseudomonal cephalosporins | 2.70 (5.09) | 0.41 (2.08) | 1.17 (1.13–1.20) | <.001 |
| Other cephalosporins | 1.59 (2.99) | 0.83 (1.71) | 1.14 (1.07–1.20) | <.001 |
| Antipseudomonal penicillins | 1.08 (3.76) | 0.14 (1.11) | 1.20 (1.13–1.27) | <.001 |
| Other penicillins | 0.80 (2.43) | 0.37 (1.70) | 1.07 (1.02–1.13) | .005 |
| Carbapenems | 0.40 (1.89) | 0.04 (0.54) | 1.29 (1.17–1.43) | <.001 |
| Macrolides | 0.16 (0.65) | 0.09 (0.68) | 1.10 (0.95–1.28) | .19 |
| Tetracyclines | 0.21 (1.26) | 0.03 (0.40) | 1.33 (1.15–1.54) | <.001 |
| Sulfonamides | 0.66 (3.09) | 0.16 (0.99) | ||
| Extended Gram-positive activity | 0.52 (2.26) | 0.03 (0.53) | 1.32 (1.19–1.46) | <.001 |
| Vancomycin | 3.75 (5.90) | 0.66 (2.20) | 1.19 (1.16–1.24) | <.001 |
| Antianaerobic | 2.40 (4.53) | 0.53 (1.93) | 1.18 (1.14–1.22) | <.001 |
note. SD, standard deviation; OR, Odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.
OR represents the odds of exposure per day.
The second case-control study examined risk factors for isolation of PSA without mutations in gyrA or parC (case 2). The results of the bivariate analysis for this study are shown in Table 4 and Table 5. Higher comorbidity scores (OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.13–1.21; P < .001) and illness severity scores (OR, 6.81; 95% CI, 5.12–9.06; P < .001) were also associated with isolation of PSA without mutations. Most antibiotic classes were significantly associated with isolation of PSA without mutations, given as odds of exposure per day (Table 5).
TABLE 4.
Unadjusted Association Between Baseline Characteristics and ISolation of P. aeruginosa Isolates Without gyrA or parC Mutations
| Risk factor | Isolates Without Mutations (N = 126) | Control Group (N = 4,564) | OR (95% CI) | P Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean age, y (SD) | 64.6 (16.5) | 54.0 (19.4) | 1.03 (1.02–1.04) | <.001 |
| Male sex, no. (%) | 75 (59.5) | 2,006 (44.0) | 1.88 (1.31–2.69) | <.001 |
| Race, no. (%) | ||||
| African American | 34 (27.0) | 1,901 (41.6) | 0.52 (0.35–0.77) | .001 |
| White | 82 (65.1) | 2,404 (52.7) | ||
| Other | 10 (7.9) | 259 (5.7) | ||
| Hospital, no. (%) | ||||
| PPMC | 40 (31.8) | 1,246 (27.3) | 1.00 (Reference) | Reference |
| HUP | 86 (68.3) | 3,318 (72.7) | 0.81 (0.55–1.18) | .27 |
| Mean Elixhauser comorbidity index score (SD) | 3.73 (4.71) | 0.84 (3.04) | 1.17 (1.13–1.21) | <.001 |
| APR-DRG severity of illness subgroup, no. (%) | 6.81 (5.12–9.06) | <.001 | ||
| Minor | 1 (0.8) | 1,314 (28.8) | ||
| Moderate | 11 (8.7) | 1,702 (37.3) | ||
| Major | 26 (20.6) | 1,135 (24.9) | ||
| Extreme | 88 (69.8) | 411 (9.0) | ||
| Mean time at risk (SD) | 20.1 (47.7) | 5.7 (6.4) | 1.07 (1.06–1.09) | <.001 |
note. OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; SD, standard deviation; HUP, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania; PPMC, Penn Presbyterian Medical Center; APR-DRG, All Patient Refined Diagnosis Related Groups.
TABLE 5.
Unadjusted Association Between Antibiotic Exposure and Isolation of P. aeruginosa Without gyrA or parC Mutations
| Mean Antibiotic Days (SD) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Antibiotic Class | Cases | Controls | ORa (95% CI) | P Value |
| Aminoglycosides | 0.24 (0.64) | 0.16 (0.76) | 1.10 (0.94–1.29) | .25 |
| Fluoroquinolones | 0.63 (2.31) | 0.32 (1.37) | 1.09 (1.01–1.18) | .02 |
| Anti-pseudomonal cephalosporins | 2.21(4.58) | 0.41 (2.08) | 1.14 (1.10–1.19) | <.001 |
| Other cephalosporins | 1.56 (2.84) | 0.83 (1.71) | 1.12 (1.06–1.19) | <.001 |
| Anti-pseudomonal penicillins | 1.21 (3.34) | 0.14 (1.11) | 1.23 (1.16–1.31) | <.001 |
| Other penicillins | 1.05 (2.57) | 0.37 (1.70) | 1.09 (1.04–1.15) | .001 |
| Carbapenems | 0.33 (1.92) | 0.04 (0.54) | 1.25 (1.12–1.40) | <.001 |
| Macrolides | 0.22 (0.88) | 0.09 (0.68) | 1.15 (1.01–1.32) | .04 |
| Tetracyclines | 0.14 (1.20) | 0.03 (0.40) | 1.24 (1.04–1.49) | .02 |
| Sulfonamides | 0.35 (1.64) | 0.16 (0.99) | ||
| Extended Gram-positive activity | 0.40 (2.62) | 0.03 (0.53) | 1.22 (1.09–1.35) | <.001 |
| Vancomycin | 3.31 (4.80) | 0.66 (2.20) | 1.18 (1.14–1.22) | <.001 |
| Anti-anaerobic | 1.68 (4.07) | 0.53 (1.93) | 1.14 (1.09–1.19) | <.001 |
note. SD, standard deviation; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.
OR represents the odds of exposure per day.
Table 6 shows the results of the multivariate analyses. After adjusting for time at risk, comorbidities, and illness severity, exposure to vancomycin (adjusted OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.04–1.13; P < .001) and to other extended Gram-positive agents (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.03–1.26; P = .01) were associated with isolation of PSA with any gyrA or parC mutations. Similar findings were demonstrated for isolation of PSA without gyrA or parC mutations (vancomycin OR, 1.09; 95% CI 1.03–1.14; P = .001; agents with extended Gram-positive activity OR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.01–1.25; P = .03). FQ use was not associated with isolation of PSA with or without mutations (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.81–1.00; P = .05 and OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.86–1.06; P = .39, respectively).
TABLE 6.
Comparison of Multivariable Models of Risk Factors for Isolation of P. aeuruginosa with gyrA and parC Mutations Versus Isolation of P. aeuruginosa Without gyrA and parC Mutationsa
| Variable | P. aeruginosa with Any gyrA/ParC Mutations Adjusted OR (95% CI) | P Value | P. aeruginosa Without gyrA/ParC Mutations Adjusted OR (95% CI) | P Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fluoroquinolones | 0.90 (0.81–1.00) | .05 | 0.96 (0.86–1.06) | .39 |
| Time at risk | 0.98 (0.96–1.00) | .46 | 0.96 (0.94–0.99) | .01 |
| Elixhauser comorbidity index score | 1.07 (1.03–1.11) | <.001 | 1.07 (1.02–1.11) | .002 |
| Illness severity | 6.10 (4.65–8.00) | <.001 | 6.19 (4.51–8.49) | <.001 |
| Vancomycin | 1.09 (1.04–1.13) | <.001 | 1.09 (1.03–1.14) | .001 |
| Other agents with extended Gram-positive activity | 1.14 (1.03–1.26) | .01 | 1.13 (1.01–1.25) | .03 |
note. OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.
Both case groups were independently compared to control group without isolate.
DISCUSSION
This is the first study, to our knowledge, to identify risk factors for specific resistance mechanisms in PSA. We found that exposure to vancomycin is a risk factor for isolation of PSA both with and without gyrA and parC mutations. Similarly, exposure to agents with extended Gram-positive activity was found to be associated with PSA with mutations both with and without gyrA and parC mutations. Interestingly, FQ exposure does not appear to be associated with isolation of PSA with gyrA and parC mutations nor with isolation of PSA without these mutations. Exposures to other antimicrobials were not associated with isolation of PSA.
More than half (172, 57.7%) of the isolates had at least 1 mutation in gyrA or parC. However, only 34 of these isolates (19.8%) showed phenotypic resistance. The accumulation of stepwise mutations in the type II topoisomerases has been shown to increase minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) to FQs in Enterobacteriaceae9,10 and is likely true for PSA, which would explain this finding. Further studies are needed to confirm the association between number and type of mutations that are associated with increasing FQ MIC and subsequent development of phenotypic FQ resistance in PSA.
Exposure to vancomycin and agents with extended Gram-positive activity (ie, daptomycin, linezolid, quinopristin-dalfopristin) is associated with isolation of PSA with or without mutations. This has also been demonstrated in previous case-case-control studies conducted by Harris et al27 examining risk factors for phenotypic resistant PSA. Exposure to vancomycin during hospitalization was identified as a risk factor for isolation of piperacillintazobactam-resistant PSA27 and imipenem-resistant PSA.28 The likely explanation is that exposure to agents with extended Gram-positive activity then selects for the isolation of Gram-negative organisms, such as PSA. Patients with higher severity of illness are more likely to receive these antibiotic classes. However, the associations between vancomycin and other Gram-positive agents and isolation of PSA remained after adjusting for illness severity and comorbidities, suggesting that the associations are independent from severity of illness.
Receipt of FQs during hospitalization has been identified as a risk factor for phenotypic FQ resistance in prior studies.11–15 However, use of the patients with antibiotic-sensitive isolates as the control group in a case-control design may overinflate the risks associated with antibiotic exposure in the case patients,16 so this association may not be seen if a case-case-control study design is employed. This study did not identify FQ exposure as a risk factor for isolation of PSA with gyrA or parC mutations, which could be related to use of the case-case-control study design. Perhaps longer duration of exposure or repeated exposure is required to develop initial mutations compared to the threshold mutation that confers phenotypic resistance. The effect of FQ exposure and timing on gyrA and parC mutation development in PSA needs to be further elucidated.
This study has several limitations. This study did not distinguish between true infection and colonization as all clinical isolates were included. Additionally, some patients with colonization may not have been captured if the colonizing site was not cultured, thereby including cases in the control group. However, given the large sample of controls, we expect this to be a small minority of patients, particularly given that PSA is a rare infecting and colonizing organism. Furthermore, the purpose of this study was to understand the risk factors for the development of a specific resistance mechanism rather than those specific to infection or colonization with a resistant organism, so we believe the study population was appropriate to answer this study question. Furthermore, misclassification of antibiotic exposure may have occurred, specifically to FQs. For example, patients with an increased number of mutations may have been exposed to FQs in prior hospitalizations, which may have deterred clinicians from using FQs during the current hospitalization given the tendency of PSA to quickly develop resistance to antibiotic agents. However, restricting our investigation to only the first PSA isolate for each patient minimized the likelihood that this was a recurrent isolate. Limiting antibiotic use to current hospitalization may not have provided a sufficient period of antibiotic exposure to see an effect, and outpatient antibiotic exposure was not collected and may have had an impact on development of mutations, but previous studies have linked phenotypic FQ resistance with antibiotics used during hospitalization. Several other factors are associated with PSA and could have been confounding variables, such as mechanical ventilation, admission to intensive care units, presence of indwelling catheters. However, adjusting for comorbidities and severity of illness should limit potential confounding by these factors, as there is likely a high level of collinearity between these variables. Patterns of antimicrobial resistance vary across regions, so the findings of this study are generalizable to healthcare settings with similar resistance rates and patterns. Finally, a limitation of the case-case-control study design is lack of quantification of differences between models. Advanced statistical methods should be developed to better compare these models.
In conclusion, the results of this study show that exposure to vancomycin and agents with extended Gram-positive activity are risk factors for isolation of PSA. No risk factors were identified that were specific to isolation of PSA with any gyrA or parC mutations. This may indicate that it is difficult to target interventions toward specific antibiotics to curb the development of FQ resistance in PSA in inpatients. Other mechanisms of resistance (eg, multi-drug efflux pumps) may play a bigger role in acute development of phenotypic FQ resistance and should be studied. Additionally, the role of patient-to-patient spread of resistant organisms may be a large driver of isolation of resistant PSA among inpatients. Further studies are needed to define the association between the number of gyrA and parC mutations that subsequently confer phenotypic FQ resistance. In addition, future studies should be conducted to identify risk factors for other mechanisms of FQ resistance alone and together with gyrA and parC mutations.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Financial support:
This work was supported by a grant from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (grant no. R21AI075303 to DRL). This work was also supported by the National Institutes of Health (grant no. K24-AI080942 to EL) and by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Epicenters Program (grant no. U54-CK000163 to EL).
Footnotes
Potential conflicts of interest: All authors have no conflicts of interest to report.
PREVIOUS PRESENTATION. These results were presented in abstract form at the Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy in Denver, Colorado, September 10–13, 2013.
REFERENCES
- 1.Gaynes R, Edwards JR. National Nosocomial Infections SurveillanceS. Overview of nosocomial infections caused by Gram-negative bacilli. Clin Infect Dis 2005;41:848–854. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Livermore DM. Multiple mechanisms of antimicrobial resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa: our worst nightmare? Clin Infect Dis 2002;34:634–640. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Aloush V, Navon-Venezia S, Seigman-Igra Y, Cabili S, Carmeli Y. Multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa: risk factors and clinical impact. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2006;50:43–48. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Cao B, Wang H, Sun H, Zhu Y, Chen M. Risk factors and clinical outcomes of nosocomial multi-drug resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections. J Hosp Infect 2004;57:112–118. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Carmeli Y, Troillet N, Karchmer AW, Samore MH. Health and economic outcomes of antibiotic resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Arch Intern Med 1999;159:1127–1132. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance S. National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance (NNIS) System Report, data summary from January 1992 through June 2004, issued October 2004. Am J Infect Control 2004;32:470–485. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Jalal S, Wretlind B. Mechanisms of quinolone resistance in clinical strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Microbial Drug Resist 1998;4:257–261. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Lee JK, Lee YS, Park YK, Kim BS. Alterations in the GyrA and GyrB subunits of topoisomerase II and the ParC and ParE subunits of topoisomerase IV in ciprofloxacin-resistant clinical isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Int J Antimicrob Agent 2005;25:290–295. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Qiang YZ, Qin T, Fu W, Cheng WP, Li YS, Yi G. Use of a rapid mismatch PCR method to detect gyrA and parC mutations in ciprofloxacin-resistant clinical isolates of Escherichia coli. J Antimicrob Chemother 2002;49:549–552. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Bagel S, Hullen V, Wiedemann B, Heisig P. Impact of gyrA and parC mutations on quinolone resistance, doubling time, and supercoiling degree of Escherichia coli. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1999;43:868–875. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Gasink LB, Fishman NO, Weiner MG, Nachamkin I, Bilker WB, Lautenbach E. Fluoroquinolone-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa: assessment of risk factors and clinical impact. Am J Med 2006; 119(526):e519–e525. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Hsu DI, Okamoto MP, Murthy R, Wong-Beringer A. Fluoroquinolone-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa: risk factors for acquisition and impact on outcomes. J Antimicrob Chemother 2005;55:535–541. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Baddour LM, Hicks DV, Tayidi MM, et al. Risk factor assessment for the acquisition of fluoroquinolone-resistant isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in a community-based hospital. Microbial Drug Resist 1995;1:219–222. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Paladino JA, Sunderlin JL, Forrest A, Schentag JJ. Characterization of the onset and consequences of pneumonia due to fluoroquinolone-susceptible or -resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Antimicrob Chemother 2003;52:457–463. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Khayr W, Rheault W, Waiters L, Walters A. Epidemiology of ciprofloxacin-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa in a veterans affairs hospital. Am J Therapeut 2000;7:309–312. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Kaye KS, Harris AD, Samore M, Carmeli Y. The case-case-control study design: addressing the limitations of risk factor studies for antimicrobial resistance. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2005;26:346–351. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Lautenbach E, Weiner MG, Nachamkin I, Bilker WB, Sheridan A, Fishman NO. Imipenem resistance among pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates: risk factors for infection and impact of resistance on clinical and economic outcomes. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2006;27:893–900. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Elixhauser A, Steiner C, Harris DR, Coffey RM. Comorbidity measures for use with administrative data. Med Care 1998;36: 8–27. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Baram D, Daroowalla F, Garcia R, et al. Use of the All Patient Refined-Diagnosis Related Group (APR-DRG) risk of mortality score as a severity adjustor in the medical ICU. Clin Med Circ Resp Pulm 2008;2:19–25. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Micek ST, Lloyd AE, Ritchie DJ, Reichley RM, Fraser VJ, Kollef MH. Pseudomonas aeruginosa bloodstream infection: importance of appropriate initial antimicrobial treatment. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2005;49:1306–1311. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Averill RF, Goldfield N, Steinbeck B, Grant T, Muldoon J, Brough J, Gay J. Development of the all patient refined DRGs (APR-DRGs). 3M HIS Research Report, 1997. [Google Scholar]
- 22.Institute of Clinical and Laboratory Standards. Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. CLSI. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2010. [Google Scholar]
- 23.Gorgani N, Ahlbrand S, Patterson A, Pourmand N. Detection of point mutations associated with antibiotic resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2009;34:414–418. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Sanger Sequencing on ABI 3730. Perelman School of Medicine Department of Genetics DNA Sequencing Facility website. Available from: http://www.med.upenn.edu/genetics/dnaseq/sanger.shtml. Accessed July 22, 2014.
- 25.Sun GW, Shook TL, Kay GL. Inappropriate use of bivariable analysis to screen risk factors for use in multivariable analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 1996;49:907–916. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Mickey RM, Greenland S. The impact of confounder selection criteria on effect estimation. Am J Epidemiol 1989;129:125–137. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Harris AD, Perencevich E, Roghmann MC, Morris G, Kaye KS, Johnson JA. Risk factors for piperacillin-tazobactam-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa among hospitalized patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2002;46:854–858. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Harris AD, Smith D, Johnson JA, Bradham DD, Roghmann MC. Risk factors for imipenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa among hospitalized patients. Clin Infect Dis 2002;34:340–345. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]