Investigation of Metallo-Beta-Lactamases in Carbapenem Resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa Strains by Phenotypic and Genotypic Methods

Abstract

Introduction: Carbapenem resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa strains cause serious problems in treatment. A large number of identified metallo-beta-lactamase (MBL) enzymes produced by P. aeruginosa are one of the most important mechanisms in resistance to carbapenems. MBL genes are located on the chromosome or plasmid, and they can easily spread between different bacterial strains. The activities of these enzymes are zinc-dependent, and they are inhibited by ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA). Therefore, this advantage is used in MBL identification tests. In this study, it was aimed to determine MBL among P. aeruginosa strains. Materials and Methods: MBL existence was investigated in 35 P. aeruginosa strains accepted to be mildly susceptible/resistant to any of the carbapenem group of antibiotics through phenotypic and genotypic methods. Phenotypic tests were performed as double disk synergy test (DDST), combined disk diffusion tests (CDDT) by using 0.1 M and 0.5 M EDTA, MBL E-test, and modified Hodge test (MHT). blaIMP, blaVIM, blaGIM, blaSIM, blaSPM genes and blaNDM gene were investigated by multiplex polimerase chain reaction (PCR) and PCR, respectively. Escherichia coli ATCC 25922 and P. aeruginosa ATCC 27853 standard bacteria were used in tests. VIM-1, VIM-2, IMP-13, SPM-1, NDM-1 type MBL-producing P. aeruginosa strains were used as positive controls. Results: Among the carbapenems resistant P. aeruginosa isolates, positivity of MBL was found as 54.2% by MBL E-test, 42.8% by DDST, 94.2% and 37.1% by CDDT method using 0.5 M and 0.1 M EDTA, respectively. Modified Hodge test and genotypic method did not detect MBL. Conclusion: In order to correctly evaluate the results of the phenotypic method, the investigation of resistance genes by molecular methods is also required. The most common metallo-beta-lactamase enzymes responsible for resistance to carbapenem in Pseudomonas were not observed. It was thought that different mechanisms might be responsible for the identified carbapenem resistance.