Nhung N T, Cuong N V, Campbell J, Hoa N T, Bryant J E, Truc V N T, Kiet B T, Jombart T, Trung N V, Hien V B, Thwaites G, Baker S, Carrique-Mas J
Hospital for Tropical Diseases, Wellcome Trust Major Overseas Programme, Oxford University Clinical Research Unit, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
Hospital for Tropical Diseases, Wellcome Trust Major Overseas Programme, Oxford University Clinical Research Unit, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam Centre for Tropical Medicine, Nuffield Department of Clinical Medicine, Oxford University, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2015 Feb;81(3):812-20. doi: 10.1128/AEM.03366-14. Epub 2014 Nov 14.
In Mekong Delta farms (Vietnam), antimicrobials are extensively used, but limited data are available on levels of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) among Escherichia coli isolates. We performed a structured survey of AMR in E. coli isolates (n = 434) from 90 pig, chicken, and duck farms. The results were compared with AMR among E. coli isolates (n = 234) from 66 small wild animals (rats and shrews) trapped on farms and in forests and rice fields. The isolates were susceptibility tested against eight antimicrobials. E. coli isolates from farmed animals were resistant to a median of 4 (interquartile range [IQR], 3 to 6) antimicrobials versus 1 (IQR, 1 to 2) among wild mammal isolates (P < 0.001). The prevalences of AMR among farmed species isolates (versus wild animals) were as follows: tetracycline, 84.7% (versus 25.6%); ampicillin, 78.9% (versus 85.9%); trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, 52.1% (versus 18.8%); chloramphenicol, 39.9% (versus 22.5%); amoxicillin-clavulanic acid, 36.6% (versus 34.5%); and ciprofloxacin, 24.9% (versus 7.3%). The prevalence of multidrug resistance (MDR) (resistance against three or more antimicrobial classes) among pig isolates was 86.7% compared to 66.9 to 72.7% among poultry isolates. After adjusting for host species, MDR was ∼8 times greater among isolates from wild mammals trapped on farms than among those trapped in forests/rice fields (P < 0.001). Isolates were assigned to unique profiles representing their combinations of susceptibility results. Multivariable analysis of variance indicated that AMR profiles from wild mammals trapped on farms and those from domestic animals were more alike (R(2) range, 0.14 to 0.30) than E. coli isolates from domestic animals and mammals trapped in the wild (R(2) range, 0.25 to 0.45). The results strongly suggest that AMR on farms is a key driver of environmental AMR in the Mekong Delta.
在湄公河三角洲地区(越南)的养殖场中,抗生素被广泛使用,但关于大肠杆菌分离株中抗生素耐药性(AMR)水平的数据却很有限。我们对来自90个猪、鸡和鸭养殖场的大肠杆菌分离株(n = 434)进行了一项关于AMR的结构化调查。将结果与从养殖场以及森林和稻田中捕获的66只小型野生动物(大鼠和鼩鼱)的大肠杆菌分离株(n = 234)的AMR情况进行了比较。这些分离株针对8种抗生素进行了药敏试验。来自养殖动物的大肠杆菌分离株对4种(四分位距[IQR],3至6种)抗生素耐药,而野生哺乳动物分离株中这一数字为1种(IQR,1至2种)(P < 0.001)。养殖物种分离株(与野生动物相比)中AMR的流行率如下:四环素,84.7%(与25.6%相比);氨苄青霉素,78.9%(与85.9%相比);甲氧苄啶 - 磺胺甲恶唑,52.1%(与18.8%相比);氯霉素,39.9%(与22.5%相比);阿莫西林 - 克拉维酸,36.6%(与34.5%相比);环丙沙星,24.9%(与7.3%相比)。猪分离株中多重耐药(MDR,对三种或更多类抗生素耐药)的流行率为86.7%,而家禽分离株中这一比例为66.9%至72.7%。在对宿主物种进行调整后,养殖场捕获的野生哺乳动物分离株中的MDR比森林/稻田中捕获的分离株高约8倍(P < 0.001)。分离株被分配到代表其药敏结果组合的独特谱型中。多变量方差分析表明,养殖场捕获的野生哺乳动物的AMR谱型与家畜的AMR谱型比家畜和野生捕获的哺乳动物的大肠杆菌分离株的AMR谱型更为相似(R²范围,0.14至0.30)(R²范围,0.25至0.45)。结果强烈表明,养殖场中的AMR是湄公河三角洲地区环境AMR的关键驱动因素。