Biofilm-producing ability of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus clinically isolated in China.
Adhesion genes
Biofilm
Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus
Journal
BMC microbiology
ISSN: 1471-2180
Titre abrégé: BMC Microbiol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100966981
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 Jul 2024
03 Jul 2024
Historique:
received:
11
01
2024
accepted:
18
06
2024
medline:
4
7
2024
pubmed:
4
7
2024
entrez:
3
7
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Staphylococcus aureus, a commensal bacterium, colonizes the skin and mucous membranes of approximately 30% of the human population. Apart from conventional resistance mechanisms, one of the pathogenic features of S. aureus is its ability to survive in a biofilm state on both biotic and abiotic surfaces. Due to this characteristic, S. aureus is a major cause of human infections, with Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) being a significant contributor to both community-acquired and hospital-acquired infections. Analyzing non-repetitive clinical isolates of MRSA collected from seven provinces and cities in China between 2014 and 2020, it was observed that 53.2% of the MRSA isolates exhibited varying degrees of ability to produce biofilm. The biofilm positivity rate was notably high in MRSA isolates from Guangdong, Jiangxi, and Hubei. The predominant MRSA strains collected in this study were of sequence types ST59, ST5, and ST239, with the biofilm-producing capability mainly distributed among moderate and weak biofilm producers within these ST types. Notably, certain sequence types, such as ST88, exhibited a high prevalence of strong biofilm-producing strains. The study found that SCCmec IV was the predominant type among biofilm-positive MRSA, followed by SCCmec II. Comparing strains with weak and strong biofilm production capabilities, the positive rates of the sdrD and sdrE were higher in strong biofilm producers. The genetic determinants ebp, icaA, icaB, icaC, icaD, icaR, and sdrE were associated with strong biofilm production in MRSA. Additionally, biofilm-negative MRSA isolates showed higher sensitivity rates to cefalotin (94.8%), daptomycin (94.5%), mupirocin (86.5%), teicoplanin (94.5%), fusidic acid (81.0%), and dalbavancin (94.5%) compared to biofilm-positive MRSA isolates. The biofilm positivity rate was consistently above 50% in all collected specimen types. MRSA strains with biofilm production capability warrant increased vigilance.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Staphylococcus aureus, a commensal bacterium, colonizes the skin and mucous membranes of approximately 30% of the human population. Apart from conventional resistance mechanisms, one of the pathogenic features of S. aureus is its ability to survive in a biofilm state on both biotic and abiotic surfaces. Due to this characteristic, S. aureus is a major cause of human infections, with Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) being a significant contributor to both community-acquired and hospital-acquired infections.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Analyzing non-repetitive clinical isolates of MRSA collected from seven provinces and cities in China between 2014 and 2020, it was observed that 53.2% of the MRSA isolates exhibited varying degrees of ability to produce biofilm. The biofilm positivity rate was notably high in MRSA isolates from Guangdong, Jiangxi, and Hubei. The predominant MRSA strains collected in this study were of sequence types ST59, ST5, and ST239, with the biofilm-producing capability mainly distributed among moderate and weak biofilm producers within these ST types. Notably, certain sequence types, such as ST88, exhibited a high prevalence of strong biofilm-producing strains. The study found that SCCmec IV was the predominant type among biofilm-positive MRSA, followed by SCCmec II. Comparing strains with weak and strong biofilm production capabilities, the positive rates of the sdrD and sdrE were higher in strong biofilm producers. The genetic determinants ebp, icaA, icaB, icaC, icaD, icaR, and sdrE were associated with strong biofilm production in MRSA. Additionally, biofilm-negative MRSA isolates showed higher sensitivity rates to cefalotin (94.8%), daptomycin (94.5%), mupirocin (86.5%), teicoplanin (94.5%), fusidic acid (81.0%), and dalbavancin (94.5%) compared to biofilm-positive MRSA isolates. The biofilm positivity rate was consistently above 50% in all collected specimen types.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
MRSA strains with biofilm production capability warrant increased vigilance.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38961344
doi: 10.1186/s12866-024-03380-8
pii: 10.1186/s12866-024-03380-8
doi:
Substances chimiques
Anti-Bacterial Agents
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
241Subventions
Organisme : The Natural Science Fund of China
ID : 82202587
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Yamazaki Y, et al. The role of Staphylococcus aureus quorum sensing in cutaneous and systemic infections. Inflamm Regen. 2024;44(1):9.
pubmed: 38429810
pmcid: 10905890
doi: 10.1186/s41232-024-00323-8
Rasigade JP, Dumitrescu O, Lina G. New epidemiology of Staphylococcus aureus infections. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2014;20(7):587–8.
pubmed: 24930666
doi: 10.1111/1469-0691.12718
Boles BR, Horswill AR. Staphylococcal biofilm disassembly. Trends Microbiol. 2011;19(9):449–55.
pubmed: 21784640
pmcid: 3164736
doi: 10.1016/j.tim.2011.06.004
Song M, et al. Staphylococcus aureus and biofilms: transmission, threats, and promising strategies in animal husbandry. J Anim Sci Biotechnol. 2024;15(1):44.
pubmed: 38475886
pmcid: 10936095
doi: 10.1186/s40104-024-01007-6
Herrmann M, et al. Fibronectin, fibrinogen, and laminin act as mediators of adherence of clinical staphylococcal isolates to foreign material. J Infect Dis. 1988;158(4):693–701.
pubmed: 3171224
doi: 10.1093/infdis/158.4.693
Franz S, et al. Immune responses to implants - a review of the implications for the design of immunomodulatory biomaterials. Biomaterials. 2011;32(28):6692–709.
pubmed: 21715002
doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.05.078
McDevitt D, et al. Molecular characterization of the clumping factor (fibrinogen receptor) of Staphylococcus aureus. Mol Microbiol. 1994;11(2):237–48.
pubmed: 8170386
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2958.1994.tb00304.x
Barbu EM, et al. SdrC induces staphylococcal biofilm formation through a homophilic interaction. Mol Microbiol. 2014;94(1):172–85.
pubmed: 25115812
pmcid: 5718044
doi: 10.1111/mmi.12750
Cue D, Lei MG, Lee CY. Genetic regulation of the intercellular adhesion locus in staphylococci. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2012;2:38.
pubmed: 23061050
pmcid: 3459252
doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2012.00038
Moormeier DE, Bayles KW. Staphylococcus aureus biofilm: a complex developmental organism. Mol Microbiol. 2017;104(3):365–76.
pubmed: 28142193
pmcid: 5397344
doi: 10.1111/mmi.13634
Wang J, et al. Structural insights into the intermolecular interaction of the adhesin SdrC in the pathogenicity of Staphylococcus aureus. Acta Crystallogr F Struct Biol Commun. 2021;77(Pt 2):47–53.
pubmed: 33620037
pmcid: 7900927
doi: 10.1107/S2053230X21000741
Herman-Bausier P, et al. Staphylococcus aureus Fibronectin-binding protein A mediates cell-cell adhesion through Low-Affinity Homophilic Bonds. mBio. 2015;6(3):e00413–15.
pubmed: 26015495
pmcid: 4447249
doi: 10.1128/mBio.00413-15
Park PW, et al. Molecular cloning and expression of the gene for elastin-binding protein (ebpS) in Staphylococcus aureus. J Biol Chem. 1996;271(26):15803–9.
pubmed: 8663124
doi: 10.1074/jbc.271.26.15803
Downer R, et al. The elastin-binding protein of Staphylococcus aureus (EbpS) is expressed at the cell surface as an integral membrane protein and not as a cell wall-associated protein. J Biol Chem. 2002;277(1):243–50.
pubmed: 11684686
doi: 10.1074/jbc.M107621200
Peng Q et al. A review of Biofilm formation of Staphylococcus aureus and its regulation mechanism. Antibiot (Basel), 2022. 12(1).
Verderosa AD, Totsika M, Fairfull-Smith KE. Bacterial Biofilm Eradication Agents: Curr Rev Front Chem. 2019;7:824.
Evans JJ, Bolz DD. Regulation of virulence and antibiotic resistance in Gram-positive microbes in response to cell wall-active antibiotics. Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2019;32(3):217–22.
pubmed: 31021953
pmcid: 6652212
doi: 10.1097/QCO.0000000000000542
Khatoon Z, et al. Bacterial biofilm formation on implantable devices and approaches to its treatment and prevention. Heliyon. 2018;4(12):e01067.
pubmed: 30619958
pmcid: 6312881
doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2018.e01067
Kaplan JB, et al. Extracellular polymeric substance (EPS)-degrading enzymes reduce staphylococcal surface attachment and biocide resistance on pig skin in vivo. PLoS ONE. 2018;13(10):e0205526.
pubmed: 30304066
pmcid: 6179274
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0205526
O’Gara JP. Into the storm: chasing the opportunistic pathogen Staphylococcus aureus from skin colonisation to life-threatening infections. Environ Microbiol. 2017;19(10):3823–33.
pubmed: 28631399
doi: 10.1111/1462-2920.13833
Watkins KE, Unnikrishnan M. Evasion of host defenses by intracellular Staphylococcus aureus. Adv Appl Microbiol. 2020;112:105–41.
pubmed: 32762866
doi: 10.1016/bs.aambs.2020.05.001
Davies D. Understanding biofilm resistance to antibacterial agents. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2003;2(2):114–22.
pubmed: 12563302
doi: 10.1038/nrd1008
Indrawattana N, et al. Staphylococcus aureus clinical isolates: antibiotic susceptibility, molecular characteristics, and ability to form biofilm. Biomed Res Int. 2013;2013:p314654.
doi: 10.1155/2013/314654
Craft KM, et al. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA): antibiotic-resistance and the biofilm phenotype. Medchemcomm. 2019;10(8):1231–41.
pubmed: 31534648
pmcid: 6748282
doi: 10.1039/C9MD00044E
Archer NK, et al. Staphylococcus aureus biofilms: properties, regulation, and roles in human disease. Virulence. 2011;2(5):445–59.
pubmed: 21921685
pmcid: 3322633
doi: 10.4161/viru.2.5.17724
Chen Q, et al. Biofilm formation and prevalence of adhesion genes among Staphylococcus aureus isolates from different food sources. Microbiologyopen. 2020;9(1):e00946.
pubmed: 31769202
doi: 10.1002/mbo3.946
Chen L et al. Biofilm Production ability, virulence and Antimicrobial Resistance genes in Staphylococcus aureus from various Veterinary hospitals. Pathogens, 2020. 9(4).
Uribe-Garcia A, et al. Frequency and expression of genes involved in adhesion and biofilm formation in Staphylococcus aureus strains isolated from periodontal lesions. J Microbiol Immunol Infect. 2021;54(2):267–75.
pubmed: 31300301
doi: 10.1016/j.jmii.2019.05.010
Patti JM, et al. Critical residues in the ligand-binding site of the Staphylococcus aureus collagen-binding adhesin (MSCRAMM). J Biol Chem. 1995;270(20):12005–11.
pubmed: 7744851
doi: 10.1074/jbc.270.20.12005
Pereyra EA, et al. Detection of Staphylococcus aureus adhesion and biofilm-producing genes and their expression during internalization in bovine mammary epithelial cells. Vet Microbiol. 2016;183:69–77.
pubmed: 26790937
doi: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2015.12.002
Khoramian B, et al. Comparison of virulence factors and biofilm formation among Staphylococcus aureus strains isolated from human and bovine infections. Microb Pathog. 2015;88:73–7.
pubmed: 26279194
doi: 10.1016/j.micpath.2015.08.007
Roche FM, et al. The N-terminal A domain of fibronectin-binding proteins A and B promotes adhesion of Staphylococcus aureus to elastin. J Biol Chem. 2004;279(37):38433–40.
pubmed: 15234962
doi: 10.1074/jbc.M402122200
Atshan SS et al. Prevalence of adhesion and regulation of biofilm-related genes in different clones of Staphylococcus aureus J Biomed Biotechnol, 2012. 2012: p. 976972.
Keinhorster D, et al. Function and regulation of Staphylococcus aureus wall teichoic acids and capsular polysaccharides. Int J Med Microbiol. 2019;309(6):151333.
pubmed: 31362856
doi: 10.1016/j.ijmm.2019.151333
Melles DC, et al. Serotyping of Dutch Staphylococcus aureus strains from carriage and infection. FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol. 2008;52(2):287–92.
pubmed: 18218024
doi: 10.1111/j.1574-695X.2008.00376.x
Rozemeijer W, et al. Evaluation of approaches to monitor Staphylococcus aureus virulence factor expression during human disease. PLoS ONE. 2015;10(2):e0116945.
pubmed: 25719409
pmcid: 4342157
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0116945
Salimena AP, et al. Genotypic and phenotypic detection of capsular polysaccharide and biofilm formation in Staphylococcus aureus isolated from bovine milk collected from Brazilian dairy farms. Vet Res Commun. 2016;40(3–4):97–106.
pubmed: 27255108
doi: 10.1007/s11259-016-9658-5
Seaman P, et al. Susceptibility of capsular Staphylococcus aureus strains to some antibiotics, triclosan and cationic biocides. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2004;54(3):696–8.
pubmed: 15282235
doi: 10.1093/jac/dkh382
Bowler PG. Antibiotic resistance and biofilm tolerance: a combined threat in the treatment of chronic infections. J Wound Care. 2018;27(5):273–7.
pubmed: 29738295
doi: 10.12968/jowc.2018.27.5.273
Costerton JW, Stewart PS, Greenberg EP. Bacterial biofilms: a common cause of persistent infections. Science. 1999;284(5418):1318–22.
pubmed: 10334980
doi: 10.1126/science.284.5418.1318
Hall-Stoodley L, Costerton JW, Stoodley P. Bacterial biofilms: from the natural environment to infectious diseases. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2004;2(2):95–108.
pubmed: 15040259
doi: 10.1038/nrmicro821
Yang X, et al. Multiresistant ST59-SCCmec IV-t437 clone with strong biofilm-forming capacity was identified predominantly in MRSA isolated from Chinese children. BMC Infect Dis. 2017;17(1):733.
pubmed: 29178841
pmcid: 5702180
doi: 10.1186/s12879-017-2833-7
Yu S, et al. Investigation of biofilm production and its association with genetic and phenotypic characteristics of OM (osteomyelitis) and non-OM orthopedic Staphylococcus aureus. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob. 2020;19(1):10.
pubmed: 32220258
pmcid: 7099788
doi: 10.1186/s12941-020-00352-4
Pinto RM, et al. Impact of nanosystems in Staphylococcus aureus biofilms treatment. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2019;43(6):622–41.
pubmed: 31420962
pmcid: 8038934
doi: 10.1093/femsre/fuz021
Wang B, et al. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in China: a multicentre longitudinal study and whole-genome sequencing. Emerg Microbes Infect. 2022;11(1):532–42.
pubmed: 35060838
pmcid: 8843102
doi: 10.1080/22221751.2022.2032373
Zhu H, et al. Comparison of molecular characteristics between Methicillin-resistant and -susceptible Staphylococcus aureus Clinical isolates by whole-genome sequencing. Infect Drug Resist. 2022;15:2949–58.
pubmed: 35706925
pmcid: 9190744
doi: 10.2147/IDR.S359654
Kranjec C, et al. A bacteriocin-based antimicrobial formulation to effectively disrupt the cell viability of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) biofilms. Volume 6. NPJ Biofilms Microbiomes; 2020. p. 58. 1.
Mirzaee M, et al. Relationship between adhesin genes and biofilm formation in Vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus clinical isolates. Curr Microbiol. 2015;70(5):665–70.
pubmed: 25572495
doi: 10.1007/s00284-014-0771-9