Using whole genome sequencing to characterize Clostridioides difficile isolates at a tertiary center in Melbourne, Australia

Alice Liu, Eddie Chan, Victoria Madigan, Vivian Leung, Lucille Dosvaldo, N. Sherry, Benjamin Howden, Katherine Bond, Caroline Marshall
{"title":"Using whole genome sequencing to characterize Clostridioides difficile isolates at a tertiary center in Melbourne, Australia","authors":"Alice Liu, Eddie Chan, Victoria Madigan, Vivian Leung, Lucille Dosvaldo, N. Sherry, Benjamin Howden, Katherine Bond, Caroline Marshall","doi":"10.1017/ash.2023.529","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Objective: Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is the commonest cause of healthcare-associated diarrhea and undergoes standardized surveillance and mandatory reporting in most Australian states and territories. Historically attributed to nosocomial spread, local and international whole genome sequencing (WGS) data suggest varied sources of acquisition. This study describes C. difficile genotypes isolated at a tertiary center in Melbourne, Australia, their likely source of acquisition, and common risk factors. Design: Retrospective observational study. Setting: The Royal Melbourne Hospital (RMH), a 570-bed tertiary center in Victoria, Australia. Methods: Short-read whole genome sequencing was performed on 75 out of 137 C. difficile isolates obtained from 1/5/2021 to 28/2/2022 and compared to previous data from 8/11/2015 to 1/11/2016. Existing data from infection control surveillance and electronic medical records were used for epidemiological and risk factor analysis. Results: Eighty-five (62.1%) of the 137 cases were defined as healthcare-associated from epidemiological data. On genome sequencing, 33 different multi-locus sequence type (MLST) subtypes were identified, with changes in population structure compared to the 2015–16 period. Risk factors for CDI were present in 130 (94.9%) cases, including 108 (78.8%) on antibiotics, 86 (62.8%) on acid suppression therapy, and 25 (18.2) on chemotherapy. Conclusion: In both study periods, most C. difficile isolates were not closely related, suggesting varied sources of acquisition and that spread of C. difficile within the hospital was unlikely. Current infection control precautions may therefore warrant review. Underlying risk factors for CDI were common and may contribute to the proportion of healthcare-associated infections in the absence of proven hospital transmission.","PeriodicalId":7953,"journal":{"name":"Antimicrobial Stewardship & Healthcare Epidemiology","volume":"3 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Antimicrobial Stewardship & Healthcare Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ash.2023.529","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Objective: Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is the commonest cause of healthcare-associated diarrhea and undergoes standardized surveillance and mandatory reporting in most Australian states and territories. Historically attributed to nosocomial spread, local and international whole genome sequencing (WGS) data suggest varied sources of acquisition. This study describes C. difficile genotypes isolated at a tertiary center in Melbourne, Australia, their likely source of acquisition, and common risk factors. Design: Retrospective observational study. Setting: The Royal Melbourne Hospital (RMH), a 570-bed tertiary center in Victoria, Australia. Methods: Short-read whole genome sequencing was performed on 75 out of 137 C. difficile isolates obtained from 1/5/2021 to 28/2/2022 and compared to previous data from 8/11/2015 to 1/11/2016. Existing data from infection control surveillance and electronic medical records were used for epidemiological and risk factor analysis. Results: Eighty-five (62.1%) of the 137 cases were defined as healthcare-associated from epidemiological data. On genome sequencing, 33 different multi-locus sequence type (MLST) subtypes were identified, with changes in population structure compared to the 2015–16 period. Risk factors for CDI were present in 130 (94.9%) cases, including 108 (78.8%) on antibiotics, 86 (62.8%) on acid suppression therapy, and 25 (18.2) on chemotherapy. Conclusion: In both study periods, most C. difficile isolates were not closely related, suggesting varied sources of acquisition and that spread of C. difficile within the hospital was unlikely. Current infection control precautions may therefore warrant review. Underlying risk factors for CDI were common and may contribute to the proportion of healthcare-associated infections in the absence of proven hospital transmission.
利用全基因组测序确定澳大利亚墨尔本一家三级中心艰难梭菌分离物的特征
摘要 目的:艰难梭菌感染(CDI)是最常见的医源性腹泻病因,澳大利亚大多数州和地区都对其进行标准化监测和强制报告。艰难梭菌感染历来被认为是由病原微生物传播引起的,但本地和国际全基因组测序(WGS)数据表明其感染来源多种多样。本研究描述了在澳大利亚墨尔本一家三级中心分离出的艰难梭菌基因型、其可能的感染来源以及常见的风险因素。设计:回顾性观察研究。地点:墨尔本皇家医院(RM墨尔本皇家医院(RMH),澳大利亚维多利亚州一家拥有 570 张病床的三级医疗中心。方法:短读全基因组测序对 2021 年 5 月 1 日至 2022 年 2 月 28 日期间获得的 137 例艰难梭菌分离株中的 75 例进行短读全基因组测序,并与 2015 年 11 月 8 日至 2016 年 11 月 1 日期间的数据进行比较。来自感染控制监测和电子病历的现有数据被用于流行病学和风险因素分析。结果根据流行病学数据,137 例病例中有 85 例(62.1%)被定义为医疗相关病例。通过基因组测序,确定了33种不同的多焦点序列类型(MLST)亚型,与2015-16年期间相比,人群结构发生了变化。130例(94.9%)病例存在CDI风险因素,其中108例(78.8%)正在使用抗生素,86例(62.8%)正在接受抑酸治疗,25例(18.2%)正在接受化疗。结论在两个研究期间,大多数艰难梭菌分离株之间的关系并不密切,这表明艰难梭菌的感染来源多种多样,在医院内传播的可能性不大。因此,需要对当前的感染控制预防措施进行审查。艰难梭菌感染的潜在风险因素很常见,在没有证实医院传播的情况下,这些因素可能会导致医护人员相关感染的比例增加。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信