The following antibiotic-resistant microorganisms are considered serious health concerns worldwide:
Enterobacteriaceae,
Acinetobacter,
Campylobacter,
Candida,
Enterococcus,
Salmonella,
Shigella,
Staphylococcus,
Streptococcus,
Mycobacterium,
Clostridium,
Neisseria, and
Pseudomonas (
7,
16). Furthermore, concerns regarding the spread of ESBL-producing bacteria are significantly increasing because treatment outcome in patients infected with such pathogens is less satisfactory (
11). ESBLs have been abundantly reported in
E. coli and
K. pneumonia and have recently been detected in
P. aeruginosa (
11). Therefore, it is necessary to prevent the spread of ESBL-producing bacteria, especially in hospital environments.
There are various phenotypic and genotypic tests to detect ESBLs in
Enterobacteriaceae clinical isolates with little or no chromosomal β-lactamase activity (
11). Based on the ESBL screening phenotypic test, 8.3% of
P. aeruginosa strains isolated from Ardabil hospitals were identified as ESBL-producing strains. Similar results to our study have been reported by Nazari Alam et al. (12.7%) (
17), Tavajjohi and Moniri (9.2%) (
18), and Laudy et al. (12.2%) (
19). However, other studies from Iran and other countries have reported higher prevalence rates, including Vahdani et al. (18%) (
20), Akhi et al. (39.3%) (
21), Mirsalehian et al. (39.4%) (
22), Jabalameli et al. (42.8%) (
23), Tawfik et al. (16%) (
24), Shaikh et al. (25.1%) (
25), and Chen et al. (87.5%) (
26).
Cefotaximase, TEM, and SHV enzymes are considered the most prevalent ESBLs in bacterial pathogens globally (
11). Various studies have reported the prevalence of these enzymes in clinical isolates of
P. aeruginosa worldwide. In this regard, Bokaeian et al. found that TEM was present in 100% of isolates and SHV in 6.6% of them (
27). Imani Foolad et al. reported SHV in 37.5% and TEM in 12.5% of isolates (
28), while Nazari Alam et al. found SHV in 52.4% and TEM in 33.3% of isolates (
17). Dong et al. did not detect any SHV or TEM in their isolates (
29), and Jiang et al. found TEM in 17% of their isolates (
13).
In the current study, the prevalence of
TEM,
CTX-M, and
SHV genes were 10% (12/120), 1.6% (2/120), and 0%, respectively. Among
P. aeruginosa and
Acinetobacter species, PER- and oxacillinase (OXA)-type enzymes are more prevalent (
11). In studies conducted by Lee et al. in Korea (
15), Tawfik et al. in Saudi Arabia (
24), and Chen et al. in China (
26), as well as other studies in Iran, including Akhi et al. in Tabriz (
21), Jabalameli et al. in Tehran (
23), Alikhani et al. in Hamadan (
30), and Amirkamali et al. in Qazvin (
31), the prevalence of PER-type ESBLs were 0%, 0%, 13.8%, 27.5%, 50%, 26.6%, 0%, respectively. Nevertheless, the frequency of the
PER gene was 0.8% (1/120) in the present study. Another most common class A ESBLs among
P. aeruginosa strains is PSE-type enzymes (
15). In this study, the most prevalent gene encoding class A ESBLs was
PSE (25.8%; 31/120). Lee et al. reported the prevalence of PSE-type ESBLs at 6.3% in
P. aeruginosa strains (
15).
The frequency of VEB-type (1.6%; 2/120) and GES-type (0%) ESBLs in
P. aeruginosa strains was lower in the current study than that reported by Tawfik et al. in Saudi Arabia (68% and 20%, respectively) (
24). However, Lee et al. in Korea reported that none of the
P. aeruginosa strains harbored genes encoding VEB- and GES-type ESBLs (
15). Differences between the results of phenotypic and genotypic tests for ESBL screening in this study can be attributed to the presence of inducible chromosomal β-lactamases, efflux pumps, and higher impermeability in
P. aeruginosa compared with
Enterobacteriaceae (
13).
In studies conducted by Khademi et al. on the same clinical isolates of P. aeruginosa in Ardabil, the prevalence and upregulation/downregulation of AmpC β-lactamase enzyme, efflux pumps (MexAB-OprM, MexCD-OprJ, MexEF-OprN, and MexXY-OprM), and OprD porin among carbapenem-resistant and MDR strains were evaluated (data unpublished). The prevalence of inducible AmpC β-lactamase enzyme in phenotypic and genotypic tests was 52.5% and 100%, respectively. Among them, 33.3% of isolates showed a high expression level of the ampC gene based on real-time PCR. In addition, the role of 4 efflux pumps of P. aeruginosa in the emergence of drug-resistant clinical isolates was obvious. Overexpression of the mexA, mexC, mexE, and mexY genes was seen in 36 (75%), 40 (83.3%), 5 (10.4%), and 20 (41.6%) carbapenem-resistant and MDR P. aeruginosa clinical isolates. Furthermore, the oprD gene downregulation was observed in 79.1% of these P. aeruginosa isolates. The sequencing method was used to identify many TEM and SHV family variants. Temoniera and SHV family variants were not determined in our study, and this was the main limitation of the current study.
5.1. Conclusions
Our results confirmed that PSE, TEM, VEB, CTX-M, and PER were the predominant genes encoding class A ESBLs in P. aeruginosa strains in Ardabil City. On the other hand, we concluded that the use of molecular tests could be a more precise and reliable method than phenotypic ones to identify these resistant strains and prevent the emergence of antibiotic resistance and ensuing treatment failure.