According to the literature, EPEC is a significant cause of acute diarrhea, especially in developing countries. Owing to their high prevalence of this type of
E. coli in both community and hospital settings, it is responsible for approximately 11% of all diarrhea mortalities in children aged below five years in the world (
1,
2). Moreover, severe malabsorption of nutrients might be caused by EPEC, helping the nutritional aggravation and the persistence of diarrhea (
5). In the present study, the results of PCR detection of
eaeA gene were indicative of 6.78% frequency of EPEC in the
E. coli isolates, which was higher, compared to the prevalence rate mentioned in two reports by Nakhjavani (5.6%), Asadi Karam (5.3%) and lower than report by Moshtagian (21.5%) in Iran (
30-
32), and also higher from some neighboring countries, including Iraq (3.4%) and Turkey (2.05%) (
33,
34). This rate was also lower, compared to the reports from Kuwait (8.4%) and Pakistan (
35,
36). The results of previous studies propose that differences in the type of samples, method for sampling, geographical area, antibiotic prescription are important criteria in epidemiology in children with diarrhea, which leads to different data between these investigations (
37).
The presence of
stx and/or
eaeA genes can distinguish Shiga toxin-producing
E. coli strains (STEC) from EPEC strains (
38). Similar to numerous studies (
33,
39), none of the
E. coli isolates were positive for the
stx gene in the present study, which resulted in a lack of their characterization as STEC. In clinical laboratories, serogrouping with O-type antisera is still a useful diagnostic method to determine a limited number of EPEC serogroups (
40). In the current study, nearly half of EPEC strains were not typeable with diagnostic antisera and often belonged to the atypical group. In this regard, our findings are consistent with other studies (
41), which demonstrated that serogrouping is a tedious, laborious, and time-consuming process and fails to identify some of the EPEC strains. Therefore, PCR methods can be a reliable, fast, and sensitive alternative applied to identify the EPEC strains that belong to serogroups not detected by commercially available antisera (
39,
40).
Moreover, our findings revealed the role of EPEC strains, which belong to serogroups O26, 055, and O111, in the majority of EPEC diarrhea in the southwest of Iran, Ahvaz. In accordance with the present study, O55, O111, and O26 serogroups were responsible for 54.5% of diarrhea in children of Iraq (
33). Meanwhile, the most prevalent serogroups in Iran are O127 and O128, respectively (
26,
41). Depending on the presence or absence of the EPEC adherence factor plasmid (pEAF), EPEC may be subdivided into typical (tEPEC;
eaeA+ and
bfpA+) or atypical (aEPEC;
eaeA+
bfpA–) EPEC (
12). In the current research, approximately 65% of the 17 tested EPEC isolates were subdivided as atypical EPEC strains. These findings are in congruence with other reports, indicating the high prevalence of EPEC strains among young children in developing countries (
5,
42,
43).
The exact mechanisms of aEPEC-induced diarrhea are still not completely understood (
43,
44). Recently, Afset et al. detected a significant association between the prevalence of diarrhea and the presence of the O island 122 (OI-122), including
efa1/lifA and several other genes (
45). Moreover, there is the possibility of a correlation between the pathogenesis of aEPEC and its serogroups. In the present study,
efa1/lifA genes were found in none of the aEPEC serogroups. In this respect, our findings are in line with the idea that EPEC strains from different serogroups may contain various pathogenic genes. EPEC diarrhea is often mild and self-limiting and effectively treated with oral rehydration therapy. Meanwhile, persistent infections may require the use of antimicrobial treatment (
4,
20).
In the current study, antibiotic susceptibility testing was performed on the EPEC isolates. According to the results, the highest resistance rates were related to ampicillin (100%), ceftriaxone (76.5%), cotrimoxazole (70.6%), cefotaxime (64.7), and ceftazidime (52.9%), respectively. However, all EPEC isolates were sensitive to colistin, meropenem, and imipenem. Several studies have reported various levels of antibiotic resistance in EPEC isolates from developed and developing countries. Diversity in the time and region of these investigations might have led to these conflicting results. Compared to the present research, previous studies in Iran have reported a low prevalence of resistance to ampicillin, cotrimoxazole, cefotaxime, and ceftazidime (
30,
41). In a study in India, a lower percentage of drug resistance to cotrimoxazole (35.49%), ceftriaxone (32.20%), and ciprofloxacin (25.42%) was described. In addition, while resistant to meropenem was reported at (25.42%), all EPEC isolates were susceptible to imipenem, which is in congruence with our findings (
42). In Iraq, the high prevalence of resistance was related to ampicillin (97.4%), cotrimoxazole (82%), cefotaxime (89.7%), and ceftazidime (79.5%) (
46).
Resistance to carbapenems is of significant importance in the treatment of patients infected with gram-negative bacteria. The carbapenemase enzymes can cause pan-drug resistant (PDR) strains since they regularly transport on plasmids in combination with other resistance genes, especially ESBL genes. According to the results of the present research, EPEC strains are highly susceptible to carbapenem antibiotics and have not yet gained the carbapenemase genes. Therefore, the clinicians should consider this issue in prescribing antibiotics to patients in this area. Conflicting reports have been reported by researchers in Iran, including Memariani et al., who showed a lack of ability to achieve any resistance to imipenem. On the other hand, Nakhjavani et al. marked that resistance to imipenem in the EPEC strain was 26% (
30,
41). In a study in India, the prevalence of imipenem and meropenem resistance was 15% and 2.5%, respectively (
47). Moreover, no resistance to imipenem was reported in Kuwait (
38).
In susceptibility tests, multidrug-resistant strain (MDR) is used for isolates with resistance to three or more antibiotics. A total of 13 (76.47%) EPEC isolates were MDR, 53.3% of which were atypical, and 33.3% were typical strains. Some studies have reported fewer number of these strains. For instance, 45.83% of MDR strains were reported in India (
47). A combined disk test (CDT) is performed for all the strains that are resistant to cephalosporine antibiotics, such as cefotaxime, ceftazidime, cepdotoxime, and ceftriaxone. Among these strains, a positive result was obtained in 13 (76.47%) of EPEC strains by CDT in the current investigation. Among the evaluated ESBL producer isolates, the prevalence of
blaCTX-M and
blaTEM was 12 (70.5%) and 10 (58.8%) in genotypic detection of beta-lactamase genes, respectively. Another research reported 21% ESBL-positive by CDT, 88.8%
blaCTX-M, and 19%
blaTEM found in these strains by genotypic test in Iran (
41). Other data have revealed 45.83% positive isolates in CDT test. Moreover,
blaTEM and
blaCTX-M were displayed in 35.5% and 19.5% of EPEC isolates from India (
47). In the case of phenotypic and genotypic ESBL tests, few studies have been carried out, yielding conflicting results.
5.1. Conclusions
In the current study, EPEC isolates had high resistance to third-generation cephalosporins and fluoroquinolones. Carbapenems are highly effective drugs for the treatment of such infections. The importance of MDR strains-producing β-lactamase enzymes is high-level drug resistance to main antibiotics, such as third-generation cephalosporins, fluoroquinolones. Regarding the frequency of β-lactamase genes in EPEC strains, treatment of these multidrug-resistant organisms remains a scientific concern; therefore, it is recommended that a sufficient amount of antibiotics should be carefully prescribed for the treatment of these bacteria.