Emerg Infect DisEmerging Infect. DisEIDEmerging Infectious Diseases1080-60401080-6059Centers for Disease Control and Prevention22172303331116910-158410.3201/eid1712.101584Letters to the EditorLetterPorcine and Human Community Reservoirs of Enterococcusfaecalis, DenmarkCommunity Reservoirs of E. faecalisLarsenJesperSchønheyderHenrik C.SinghKavindra V.LesterCamilla H.OlsenStefan S.PorsboLone J.Garcia-MiguraLourdesJensenLars B.BisgaardMagneMurrayBarbara E.HammerumAnette M.Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark (J. Larsen, C.H. Lester, S.S. Olsen, A.M. Hammerum);Aarhus University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark (H.C. Schønheyder);University of Texas Medical School, Houston, TX, USA (K.V. Singh, B.E. Murray);Technical University of Denmark, Søborg, Denmark (L.J. Porsbo);Technical University of Denmark, Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark (L. Garcia-Migura, L.B. Jensen);University of Copenhagen, Frederiksberg, Denmark (M. Bisgaard)Address for correspondence: Jesper Larsen, Department of Microbiological Surveillance and Research, Statens Serum Institut, Artillerivej 5, DK-2300 Copenhagen S, Denmark; email: jrl@ssi.dk122011171223952397Keywords: Enterococcus faecalisendocarditisdisease reservoirsswinemultilocus sequence typingelectrophoresisgelpulsed-fieldbiofilmsvirulence factorsdrug resistancebacteria
To the Editor:Enterococcusfaecalis, which exists commensally in the gut in warm-blooded animals and humans, is an opportunistic pathogen that causes a variety of community-acquired and health care–associated infections, such as urinary tract and intraabdominal infections, bacteremia, and endocarditis (1). Only a few studies have assessed the relationships between clinical E. faecalis strains; strains endemic to the health care setting; and community strains residing in humans, animals, or animal-origin food (2).
Recently we showed that the emergence of high-level gentamicin-resistant (HLGR) E. faecalis among patients with infective endocarditis (IE) coincided with an increase in HLGR E. faecalis in the pig population in Denmark (3). The majority of isolates belonged to the same clonal group (sequence type [ST] 16), suggesting that pigs constitute a community reservoir of HLGR E. faecalis. We investigated human and porcine community reservoirs of other E. faecalis clonal types associated with IE in humans in Denmark.
A total of 20 consecutive gentamicin-susceptible E. faecalis isolates were obtained from IE patients in North Denmark Region during 1996–2002 (Table A1). Cases of IE were classified as definite (n = 12) or possible (n = 8) according to the modified Duke criteria (4). A case of community-acquired E. faecalis infection (n = 6) was defined in accordance with strict criteria applied for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcusaureus (5); otherwise, cases were deemed to be health care associated (n = 14) (Table A1). HLGR ST16 isolates recovered from 2 IE patients during the study period have been characterized (3) and were excluded from the present study.
Using multilocus sequence typing (6), we identified 14 STs among the 20 IE isolates (Table A1), then compared them with STs from 2 collections of E. faecalis isolates collected as part of the Danish Integrated Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring and Research Program (www.danmap.org): 1) all 14 isolates recovered from community-dwelling humans in North Denmark Region during 2002–2006 with approval from the local ethics committee ([KF] 01-006/02), which were classified into 10 STs in this study (Table A1); and 2) 19 pig isolates from 2001 that were shown in a previous study to belong to 12 STs (7).
Among the 14 STs identified in IE isolates, 4 (ST19, ST21, ST72, and ST306) and 2 (ST40 and ST97) were also found among isolates from community-dwelling humans and pigs, respectively (Table A1). Isolates belonging to these 6 STs were further characterized by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) by using SmaI and grouped into PFGE pulsotypes as described (3). STs and PFGE pulsotypes (A–F) were largely concordant (ST97:A, ST72:B, ST19:C, ST40:D, ST21:E, and ST306:F), except for 2 isolates belonging to ST72 and ST40, for which PFGE banding patterns (U1 and U2, respectively) were unrelated to the major PFGE pulsotypes (A–F), and 1 ST306 isolate exhibiting the ST21-like PFGE banding pattern E (Table A1).
These findings confirm the genetic relatedness of IE isolates with those from community-dwelling humans (ST72:B, ST19:C, ST21:E, and ST306:F) and pigs (ST97:A and ST40:D). Seven (64%) of 11 IE isolates belonging to these 6 clonal types originated from IE patients with health care–associated risk factors (Table A1), which suggests that health care users are predisposed to colonization and infection with E. faecalis strains residing in human and porcine community reservoirs.
Previous reports have shown that epidemiologically distinct E. faecalis populations differ in terms of biofilm formation, virulence gene content, and antimicrobial drug susceptibility profiles (2,8). Therefore, we characterized all isolates with respect to these traits. Isolates were categorized into strong, medium, weak, and nonbiofilm formers by using the method of Mohamed et al. (8). The presence of 12 virulence-associated and pathogenicity island genes (ebpA, gelE, ef1824, hylA, ef1896, ef2347, ef2505, hylB, ace, cbh, esp, and ef0571) was investigated by using colony lysates and probes that have been described elsewhere (9). The antimicrobial drug susceptibility profiles (ampicillin, chloramphenicol, ciprofloxacin, erythromycin, gentamicin, kanamycin, linezolid, penicillin, streptomycin, teicoplanin, tetracycline, and vancomycin) were determined by the Sensititre system (Trek Diagnostic Systems, East Grinstead, UK) in accordance with Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines (10). The isolates were generally homogenous within each clonal type in terms of biofilm formation, presence of virulence-associated and pathogenicity island genes, and resistance profiles (Table A1), further supporting that IE isolates are genetically related to those from community-dwelling humans and pigs, respectively. Notably, most IE isolates were susceptible to ampicillin (100%), penicillin (100%), vancomycin (100%), high-level gentamicin (100%), and high-level streptomycin (80%), which are the drugs of choice in therapeutic regiments for E. faecalis endocarditis.
In conclusion, our results suggest that the normal intestinal microflora of humans and pigs are community reservoirs of clinical E. faecalis and link 2 porcine-origin clonal types of gentamicin-susceptible E. faecalis, ST97:A, and ST40:D to IE in humans in Denmark. This finding strengthens existing evidence that pigs can be a source of serious infections in humans.
Suggested citation for this article: Larsen J, Schønheyder HC, Singh KV, Lester CH, Olsen SS, Porsbo LJ, et al. Porcine and human community reservoirs of Enterococcus faecalis, Denmark [letter]. Emerg Infect Dis [serial on the Internet]. 2011 Dec [date cited]. http://dx.doi.org/10.3201/eid1712.101584
Acknowledgments
We thank Karin S. Pedersen for help with antimicrobial drug susceptibility testing and genotyping and Lena Mortensen for providing clinical isolates.
This work was supported by grant 271-06-0241 from the Danish Medical Research Council, the Danish Ministry of Family and Consumer Affairs, and the Danish Ministry of the Interior and Health as part of the Danish Integrated Antimicrobial Resistance and Research Program, and the European Union Sixth Framework Program “Approaches to Control Multiresistant Enterococci: Studies on molecular ecology, horizontal gene transfer, fitness and prevention” under contract LSHE-CT-2007-037410.
Origins and molecular and phenotypic characteristics of Enterococcusfaecalis isolates*
ID (other name)
Origin†
Setting
Sampling year
MLST†
PFGE‡
Biofilm formation
Virulence-associated genes
PAI genes
Resistance profile
31438-1
IE patient
HA
1997
97
A
Weak
ebpA gelE hylA ef1896 ef2505 ace
cbh
None
130529
IE patient
HA
2000
97
A
Weak
ebpA gelE hylA ef1896 ef2505 ace
cbh
None
67190
IE patient
CA
2002
97
A
Weak
ebpA gelE hylA ef1896 ef2505 ace
cbh
None
7330616-3 (D30)
Pig
NA
2001
97
A
Weak
ebpA gelE hylA ef1896 ef2505 ace
cbh
None
28137
IE patient
HA
1996
72
B
None
ebpA gelE ef1824 hylA ef2505 hlyB ace
cbh
None
7684
IE patient
HA
1997
72
B
Weak
ebpA gelE ef1824 hylA ef2505 hlyB ace
cbh
None
33873
IE patient
HA
2002
72
B
Medium
ebpA gelE ef1824 hylA ef2505 hlyB ace
cbh
None
1293
CD human
NA
2003
72
B
Medium
ebpA gelE ef1824 hylA ef2505 hlyB ace
cbh
None
3527
CD human
NA
2006
72
B
Medium
ebpA gelE ef1824 hylA ef2505 hlyB ace
cbh
None
1745
CD human
NA
2004
72
U1
Weak
ebpA gelE ef1824 hylA ef2505 hlyB ace
cbh
TET
43674
IE patient
CA
1999
19
C
Medium
ebpA gelE ef2505 hlyB ace
None
ERY TET
2247
CD human
NA
2004
19
C
Medium
ebpA gelE ef2505 hlyB ace
cbh esp
CIP ERY TET
54869
IE patient
HA
1997
40
D
Weak
ebpA gelE hylA ef2505 hlyB ace
cbh
KAN STR TET
7330082-2 (D1)
Pig
NA
2001
40
D
Medium
ebpA gelE hylA ef2505 hlyB ace
cbh esp
None
7330321-1 (D27)
Pig
NA
2001
40
D
Medium
ebpA gelE hylA ef2505 hlyB ace
cbh esp
CHL ERY KAN STR TET
7331063-5 (D37)
Pig
NA
2001
40
D
None
ebpA gelE hylA ef2505 hlyB ace
cbh
STR
7330887-1 (D32)
Pig
NA
2001
40
U2
None
ebpA gelE hylA ef2505 hlyB ace
cbh
ERY STR
26669
IE patient
HA
1998
21
E
Weak
ebpA gelE hylA ef2505 hlyB ace
cbh
None
3162
CD human
NA
2005
21
E
Weak
ebpA gelE hylA ef2505 ace
cbh esp
TET
105049
IE patient
CA
1997
306
E
Medium
ebpA gelE hylA ef1896 ef2505 ace
cbh esp
None
127801
IE patient
CA
1999
306
F
Medium
ebpA gelE hylA ef1896 ef2505 ace
cbh esp
None
2421
CD human
NA
2004
306
F
Medium
ebpA gelE hylA ef1896 ef2505 ace
cbh esp
None
57690
IE patient
HA
2000
22
NA
Weak
ebpA gelE ef1824 hylA ef2505 hlyB ace
cbh
None
20505-1
IE patient
HA
2000
30
NA
Weak
ebpA gelE hylA ef1896 ef2505 ace
esp
TET
100087
IE patient
HA
1999
41
NA
Weak
ebpA gelE hylA ef1896 ef2505 ace
cbh esp
ERY KAN STR TET
105158
IE patient
HA
1997
55
NA
Medium
ebpA hylA ef1896 ef2505 hlyB ace
cbh esp
CHL ERY KAN STR TET
134125
IE patient
HA
2000
55
NA
Strong
ebpA hylA ef1896 ef2505 hlyB ace
cbh esp
CHL ERY KAN STR TET
29783
IE patient
HA
1999
81
NA
Medium
ebpA gelE ef1824 hylA ef2505 hlyB ace
cbh ef0571
None
120903
IE patient
CA
1999
192
NA
Medium
ebpA gelE ef1824 hylA ef2505 hlyB ace
None
TET
107137
IE patient
HA
2001
241
NA
Weak
ebpA gelE ef1824 hylA ef2505 hlyB ace
cbh ef0571
None
83232
IE patient
CA
1997
326
NA
Strong
ebpA gelE hylA ef1896 ef2505 ace
cbh esp
None
1149
CD human
NA
2003
133
NA
Strong
ebpA hylA ef1896 ef2505 ace
cbh
TET
3392
CD human
NA
2005
133
NA
Medium
ebpA hylA ef1896 ef2505 ace
cbh
None
1732
CD human
NA
2003
141
NA
None
ebpA gelE ef1824 hylA ef2505 hlyB ace
None
CIP
1028
CD human
NA
2003
168
NA
Strong
ebpA gelE ef1824 hylA ef2505 hlyB ace
cbh
None
1309
CD human
NA
2003
168
NA
Strong
ebpA gelE ef1824 hylA ef2505 hlyB ace
cbh
None
1413
CD human
NA
2003
199
NA
Medium
ebpA gelE ef1824 hylA ef2505 ace
cbh
None
2174
CD human
NA
2004
206
NA
Weak
ebpA hylA ef2505 ace
cbh
TET
2041
CD human
NA
2004
327
NA
Weak
ebpA hylA ef2505 ace
cbh
TET
*MLST, multi-locus sequence typing; PFGE, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis; PAI, pathogenicity island; IE, infective endocarditis; CD, community-dwelling; HA, healthcare-associated infection; CA, community-acquired infection; NA, not applicable; CHL, chloramphenicol; CIP, ciprofloxacin; ERY, erythromycin, KAN, kanamycin; STR, streptomycin; TET, tetracycline. †STs from 5 pig isolates (in italics) have been published previously (7); the remaining 14 pig isolates belonging to other STs (ST1, ST6, ST16, ST26, ST47, ST63, ST96, ST98, ST99, and ST100) were not included in further analysis. ‡Isolates with similar PFGE banding patterns (>82% relatedness) received the same letter designation (A–F) to reflect their genetic relatedness; highly divergent PFGE banding patterns were designated as unique (U) types (U1 and U2).
ReferencesAriasCA, MurrayBE. Enterococcus species, Streptococcus bovis group and Leuconostoc species. In: Mandell GL, Bennett JE, Dolin R, editors. Mandell, Douglas and Bennett’s principles and practice of infectious diseases. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier; 2010 p. 2643–53.Ruiz-GarbajosaP, CantonR, PintadoV, CoqueTM, WillemsR, BaqueroF, Genetic and phenotypic differences among Enterococcus faecalis clones from intestinal colonisation and invasive disease.Clin Microbiol Infect. 2006;12:1193–810.1111/j.1469-0691.2006.01533.x17121625LarsenJ, SchønheyderHC, LesterCH, OlsenSS, PorsboLJ, Garcia-MiguraL, Porcine-origin gentamicin-resistant Enterococcus faecalis in humans, Denmark.Emerg Infect Dis. 2010;16:682–420350387LiJS, SextonDJ, MickN, NettlesR, FowlerVGJr, RyanT, Proposed modifications to the Duke criteria for the diagnosis of infective endocarditis.Clin Infect Dis. 2000;30:633–810.1086/31375310770721NaimiTS, LeDellKH, BoxrudDJ, GroomAV, StewardCD, JohnsonSK, Epidemiology and clonality of community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in Minnesota, 1996–1998.Clin Infect Dis. 2001;33:990–610.1086/32269311528570Ruiz-GarbajosaP, BontenMJ, RobinsonDA, TopJ, NallapareddySR, TorresC, Multilocus sequence typing scheme for Enterococcus faecalis reveals hospital-adapted genetic complexes in a background of high rates of recombination.J Clin Microbiol. 2006;44:2220–810.1128/JCM.02596-0516757624ShankarN, BaghdayanAS, WillemsR, HammerumAM, JensenLB. Presence of pathogenicity island genes in Enterococcus faecalis isolates from pigs in Denmark.J Clin Microbiol. 2006;44:4200–310.1128/JCM.01218-0616957034MohamedJA, HuangW, NallapareddySR, TengF, MurrayBE. Influence of origin of isolates, especially endocarditis isolates, and various genes on biofilm formation by Enterococcus faecalis.Infect Immun. 2004;72:3658–6310.1128/IAI.72.6.3658-3663.200415155680TsigrelisC, SinghKV, CoutinhoTD, MurrayBE, BaddourLM. Vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecalis endocarditis: linezolid failure and strain characterization of virulence factors.J Clin Microbiol. 2007;45:631–5Epub 2006 Dec 2010.1128/JCM.02188-0617182759Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing: twenty-first informational supplement M100-S21. Wayne (PA): The Institute; 2011