↓ Skip to main content

Pseudomonas Endocarditis with an unstable phenotype: the challenges of isolate characterization and Carbapenem stewardship with a partial review of the literature

Overview of attention for article published in Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Pseudomonas Endocarditis with an unstable phenotype: the challenges of isolate characterization and Carbapenem stewardship with a partial review of the literature
Published in
Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13756-017-0245-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Emil Lesho, Erik Snesrud, Yoon Kwak, Ana Ong, Rosslyn Maybank, Maryrose Laguio-Vila, Ann R. Falsey, Mary Hinkle

Abstract

Pseudomonas endocarditis is exceedingly rare, especially in patients without predisposing risks. We present such a case that included unexpected switches in antibacterial resistance profiles in two Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PA) strains with the same whole-genome sequence. The case also involved diagnostic and treatment challenges, such as issues with automated testing platforms, choosing the optimal aminoglycoside, minimizing unnecessary carbapenem exposure, and the need for faster, more informative laboratory tests. On hospital day one (HD-1) a cefepime and piperacillin-tazobactam (FEP-TZP)-susceptible P. aeruginosa was isolated from the bloodstream of a 62-year-old man admitted for evaluation of possible endocarditis and treated with gentamicin and cefepime. On HD-2, his antibiotic regimen was changed to tobramycin and cefepime. On HD-11, he underwent aortic valve replacement, and P. aeruginosa was isolated from the explanted valve. Unexpectedly, it was FEP-TZP-resistant, so cefepime was switched to meropenem. On HD-14, in preparation for whole-genome sequencing (WGS), valve and blood isolates were removed from cryo-storage, re-cultured, and simultaneously tested with the same platforms, reagents, and inoculations previously used. Curiously, the valve isolate was now FEP-TZP-susceptible. WGS revealed that both isolates were phylogenetically identical, differing by a single nucleotide in a chemotaxis-encoding gene. They also contained the same resistance genes (blaADC35, aph(3')-II, blaOXA-50, catB7, fosA). Repeated testing on alternate platforms and WGS did not definitively determine the resistance mechanism(s), which in this case, is most likely unstable de-repression of a chromosomal AmpC β-lactamase, porin alterations, or efflux upregulation, with reversion to baseline (non-efflux) transcription. Although sub-culture on specialized media to select for less fit (more resistant) colonies, followed by transcriptome analysis, and multiple sequence alignment, might have revealed the mechanism and better informed the optimal choice of β-lactam, such approaches are neither rapid, nor feasible for hospital laboratories. In this era of escalating drug resistance and dwindling antibiotics, use of the most potent anti-pseudomonals must be balanced with stewardship. Clinicians need access to validated genomic correlates of resistance, and faster, more informative diagnostics. Therefore, we placed these isolates and their sequences in the public domain for inclusion in the Pseudomonas pan-genome and database projects for further countermeasure development.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 48 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 21 44%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 8%
Student > Postgraduate 2 4%
Student > Master 2 4%
Professor 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 16 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 21 44%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 10%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 6%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 2%
Mathematics 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 17 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 January 2018.
All research outputs
#6,010,075
of 24,003,070 outputs
Outputs from Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control
#587
of 1,347 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#89,949
of 319,082 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control
#11
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,003,070 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,347 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 319,082 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.