Mon, Dec 23, 2024
Volume 17, Issue 1 (Jan-Feb 2023)
mljgoums 2023, 17(1): 13-19 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Ahamdi F, Siasi Torbati E, Amini K. A Comparative Study of ERIC-PCR and BOX-PCR Methods for Evaluation of Genomic Polymorphism among Multidrug-Resistant Enterococcus faecium Clinical Isolates. mljgoums 2023; 17 (1) :13-19
URL: http://mlj.goums.ac.ir/article-1-1342-en.html
URL: http://mlj.goums.ac.ir/article-1-1342-en.html
1- Department of Microbiology, North Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2- Department of Microbiology, North Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran ,elm_Biotech2006@yahoo.com
3- Department of Microbiology, School of Basic Sciences, Saveh Branch, Islamic Azad University, Saveh, Iran
2- Department of Microbiology, North Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran ,
3- Department of Microbiology, School of Basic Sciences, Saveh Branch, Islamic Azad University, Saveh, Iran
Abstract: (1835 Views)
Background and objectives: Enterococcus faecium is a normal flora of gut microbiota. This opportunistic pathogen has attracted much attention due to its multidrug resistance and ability to survive in hostile environments. Various molecular typing methods such as pulsed-field gel electrophoresis or ribotyping have been developed for clinical and epidemiological investigation of these bacteria. However, these methods are time-consuming and labor-intensive. The present study was conducted to evaluate the discriminatory power of two common fingerprinting methods i.e. BOX-polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus (ERIC)-PCR for E. faecium clinical isolates.
Methods: Fifty multidrug-resistant E. faecium isolates were isolated from 74 clinical specimens. The isolates were identified by specific 16S rRNA PCR. All isolates were fingerprinted using BOX-PCR and ERIC PCR. The discriminatory power and reproducibility of these two methods were also assessed.
Results: According to the dendrogram with >60% similarity, 17 different genotypes were observed using ERIC PCR. In addition, BOX-PCR produced 22 distinct patterns at a genetic distance percentage of 60%, with sizes ranging from 278 bp to 1450 bp. The discrimination index of BOX-PCR was higher than that of ERIC-PCR.
Conclusion: We concluded that a combination of ERIC-PCR and BOX-PCR may be a quicker and more reliable alternative for the discrimination of E. faecium clinical isolates.
Methods: Fifty multidrug-resistant E. faecium isolates were isolated from 74 clinical specimens. The isolates were identified by specific 16S rRNA PCR. All isolates were fingerprinted using BOX-PCR and ERIC PCR. The discriminatory power and reproducibility of these two methods were also assessed.
Results: According to the dendrogram with >60% similarity, 17 different genotypes were observed using ERIC PCR. In addition, BOX-PCR produced 22 distinct patterns at a genetic distance percentage of 60%, with sizes ranging from 278 bp to 1450 bp. The discrimination index of BOX-PCR was higher than that of ERIC-PCR.
Conclusion: We concluded that a combination of ERIC-PCR and BOX-PCR may be a quicker and more reliable alternative for the discrimination of E. faecium clinical isolates.
Research Article: Original Paper |
Subject:
Microbiology
Received: 2020/11/9 | Accepted: 2021/08/22 | Published: 2022/09/6 | ePublished: 2022/09/6
Received: 2020/11/9 | Accepted: 2021/08/22 | Published: 2022/09/6 | ePublished: 2022/09/6
References
1. Zhong Z, Zhang W, Song Y, Liu W, Xu H, Xi X, et al. Comparative genomic analysis of the genus Enterococcus. Microbiol Res. 2017; 196: 95-105. [View at Publisher] [DOI:10.1016/j.micres.2016.12.009] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
2. Hanchi H, Mottawea W, Sebei K, Hammami R. The Genus Enterococcus: Between Probiotic Potential and Safety Concerns-An Update. Front Microbiol. 2018 ; 9: 1791. [DOI:10.3389/fmicb.2018.01791] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
3. Beganovic M, Luther MK, Rice LB, Arias CA, Rybak MJ, LaPlante KL. A review of combination antimicrobial therapy for Enterococcus faecium bloodstream infections and infective endocarditis. Clin Infect Dis. 2018;67(2):303-9. [View at Publisher] [DOI:10.1093/cid/ciy064] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
4. Švec P, Devriese LA. Enterococcus. Bergey's manual of systematics of archaea and bacteria. 2015:1-25. [View at Publisher] [DOI:10.1002/9781118960608.gbm00600]
5. Teixeira LM, Merquior VLC. Enterococcus. Molecular Typing in Bacterial Infections: Springer. 2013; 17-26. [View at Publisher] [DOI:10.1007/978-1-62703-185-1_2]
6. Baele M, Baele P, Vaneechoutte M, Storms V, Butaye P, Devriese LA, et al. Application of tRNA intergenic spacer PCR for identification of Enterococcus species. J Clin Microbiol. 2000; 38(11): 4201-7. [View at Publisher] [DOI:10.1128/JCM.38.11.4201-4207.2000] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
7. Michelim L, Muller G, Zacaria J, Delamare APL, Costa SOPd, Echeverrigaray S. Comparison of PCR-based molecular markers for the characterization of Proteus mirabilis clinical isolates. Braz J Infect Dis. 2008;12(5):423-9. [DOI:10.1590/S1413-86702008000500014] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
8. Mishra RK, Pandey BK, Pathak N, Zeeshan M. BOX-PCR-and ERIC-PCR-based genotyping and phylogenetic correlation among Fusarium oxysporum isolates associated with wilt disease in Psidium guajava L. Biocatalysis and Agricultural Biotechnology. 2015;4(1):25-32. [View at Publisher] [DOI:10.1016/j.bcab.2014.09.012] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
9. Švec P, Vancanneyt M, Seman M, Snauwaert C, Lefebvre K, Sedláček I, et al. Evaluation of (GTG) 5-PCR for identification of Enterococcus spp. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2005;247(1):59-63. [View at Publisher] [DOI:10.1016/j.femsle.2005.04.030] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
10. Bilung LM, Pui CF, Su'ut L, Apun K. Evaluation of BOX-PCR and ERIC-PCR as Molecular Typing Tools for Pathogenic Leptospira. Dis Markers. 2018;2018. [View at Publisher] [DOI:10.1155/2018/1351634] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
11. Versalovic J, Koeuth T, Lupski R. Distribution of repetitive DNA sequences in eubacteria and application to finerpriting of bacterial enomes. Nucleic Acids Res. 1991;19(24):6823-31. [View at Publisher] [DOI:10.1093/nar/19.24.6823] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
12. Malathum K, Singh KV, Weinstock GM, Murray BE. Repetitive sequence-based PCR versus pulsed-field gel electrophoresis for typing of Enterococcus faecium at the subspecies level. J Clin Microbiol. 1998; 36(1): 211-5. [View at Publisher] [DOI:10.1128/JCM.36.1.211-215.1998] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
13. Turabelidze D, Kotetishvili M, Kreger A, Morris JG, Sulakvelidze A. Improved pulsed-field gel electrophoresis for typing vancomycin-resistant enterococci. J Clin Microbiol. 2000;38(11):4242-5. [View at Publisher] [DOI:10.1128/JCM.38.11.4242-4245.2000] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
14. Bang K, An J-U, Kim W, Dong H-J, Kim J, Cho S. Antibiotic resistance patterns and genetic relatedness of Enterococcus faecium and Enterococcus faecium isolated from military working dogs in Korea. J Vet Sci. 2017;18(2):229-36. [View at Publisher] [DOI:10.4142/jvs.2017.18.2.229] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
15. Syrmis MW, O'carroll MR, Sloots TP, Coulter C, Wainwright CE, Bell SC, et al. Rapid genotyping of Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates harboured by adult and paediatric patients with cystic fibrosis using repetitive-element-based PCR assays. J Med Microbiol. 2004;53(11):1089-96. [View at Publisher] [DOI:10.1099/jmm.0.45611-0] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
16. Dombek PE, Johnson LK, Zimmerley ST, Sadowsky MJ. Use of repetitive DNA sequences and the PCR to differentiateEscherichia coli isolates from human and animal sources. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2000;66(6):2572-7. [View at Publisher] [DOI:10.1128/AEM.66.6.2572-2577.2000] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
17. Coenye T, Spilker T, Martin A, LiPuma JJ. Comparative assessment of genotyping methods for epidemiologic study of Burkholderia cepacia genomovar III. J Clin Microbiol. 2002; 40(9): 3300-7. [View at Publisher] [DOI:10.1128/JCM.40.9.3300-3307.2002] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
18. Talebi M, Moghadam NA, Mamooii Z, Enayati M, Saifi M, Pourshafie MR. Antibiotic resistance and biofilm formation of Enterococcus faecium in patient and environmental samples. Jundishapur journal of microbiology. 2015;8(10): e23349. [DOI:10.5812/jjm.23349] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
19. Kühn I, Iversen A, Finn M, Greko C, Burman LG, Blanch AR, et al. Occurrence and relatedness of vancomycin-resistant enterococci in animals, humans, and the environment in different European regions. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2005;71(9):5383-90. [View at Publisher] [DOI:10.1128/AEM.71.9.5383-5390.2005] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
20. David O, Oluduro A, Olawale A, Osuntoyinbo R, Olowe O, Famurewa O. Incidence of multiple antibiotic resistance and plasmid carriage among Enterococcus faecium isolated from the hands of health care workers in selected hospitals in Ekiti, Ondo and Osun states, Nigeria. International Journal of Academic Research. 2010;2(1). [View at Publisher] [Google Scholar]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
Enamad
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.