FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 10000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
BMC veterinary research2025; 22(1); 44; doi: 10.1186/s12917-025-05190-0

Prevalence of antimicrobial resistance in equine-associated Pseudomonas aeruginosa: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Abstract: The escalating issue of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in Pseudomonas aeruginosa (P. aeruginosa), particularly in the equine context, poses a significant threat to veterinary and public health. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the current landscape of AMR in P. aeruginosa strains isolated from equine sources. Adhering to the PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted, and data from eligible studies were extracted and synthesized. The review included 10 articles reporting on 1624 P. aeruginosa isolates. High resistance rates were found for several antimicrobial classes, with particular concern for increasing resistance to imipenem, amikacin, and ceftiofur. The study also identifies significant temporal trends and regional variations in resistance patterns. Asia reported the highest average resistance rates, suggesting potential misuse of antimicrobials in the region. The most effective antimicrobials were found to be aztreonam, fosfomycin, ciprofloxacin, and ceftazidime. However, the generalizability of these findings is limited by the small number of eligible studies (n = 10) and the scarcity of isolates for certain antimicrobial classes. The findings of this review highlight the critical need for innovative strategies, stringent antimicrobial stewardship, and comprehensive risk assessment to combat the escalating threat of AMR in equine-associated P. aeruginosa and preserve the efficacy of our existing antimicrobial agents.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2025-12-22 PubMed ID: 41430701PubMed Central: PMC12838499DOI: 10.1186/s12917-025-05190-0Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article
  • Systematic Review
  • Meta-Analysis

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

Overview

  • This study systematically reviewed and analyzed the resistance of Pseudomonas aeruginosa strains from horses to various antimicrobial drugs, revealing significant resistance patterns and regional differences that highlight concerns for both veterinary and public health.

Background and Importance

  • Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR): Refers to microorganisms like bacteria developing the ability to survive exposure to drugs designed to kill them, posing treatment challenges.
  • Pseudomonas aeruginosa: A bacterium commonly associated with infections in horses, but is also a concern for zoonotic transmission and clinical treatment difficulty.
  • Equine Context: The study focuses on isolates from horses, making the findings particularly relevant to veterinary medicine and potential implications for public health.

Methodology

  • Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis: The authors used a structured approach to gather, evaluate, and synthesize existing research studies.
  • PRISMA Guidelines: Ensured transparency and reproducibility in conducting the literature search and data extraction.
  • Data Sources and Selection: A total of 10 eligible studies were included, collectively reporting on 1624 isolates of P. aeruginosa from equine samples.

Key Findings

  • High Resistance Rates: Many P. aeruginosa strains showed significant resistance to multiple antimicrobial classes, raising concerns about effective treatment options.
  • Drugs Showing Increasing Resistance: Notably imipenem, amikacin, and ceftiofur indicated worrying trends of rising resistance over time.
  • Regional Variations: Asia exhibited the highest average antimicrobial resistance rates, possibly linked to antimicrobial misuse or overuse in that region.
  • Most Effective Antimicrobials: Aztreonam, fosfomycin, ciprofloxacin, and ceftazidime retained greater efficacy against the isolates, suggesting their potential utility in treatment.
  • Temporal Trends: The study found changes in resistance patterns over time, indicating evolving challenges in managing AMR in P. aeruginosa.

Limitations

  • Small Number of Studies: Only 10 studies met inclusion criteria, limiting the statistical power and scope of the conclusions.
  • Scarcity of Data for Certain Drugs: Some antimicrobial classes had very few isolates tested, reducing confidence in those specific resistance estimates.
  • Generalizability: Results might not fully apply globally due to limited geographic data and study heterogeneity.

Implications and Recommendations

  • Antimicrobial Stewardship: The findings emphasize the need for responsible use of antimicrobials to slow resistance development.
  • Innovative Strategies: Development and implementation of new therapeutic approaches or infection control measures are critical.
  • Risk Assessment: Ongoing monitoring of resistance trends will help ensure appropriate clinical decision-making and public health interventions.
  • Veterinary and Public Health Collaboration: Since P. aeruginosa can affect both animals and humans, coordinated efforts are vital.

Conclusion

  • This systematic review and meta-analysis highlight an escalating threat of antimicrobial resistance in equine-associated Pseudomonas aeruginosa, with notable resistance to key antimicrobials and regional disparities.
  • Urgent efforts are needed to preserve the effectiveness of existing drugs and prevent further spread of resistant strains in the equine industry and beyond.

Cite This Article

APA
Yang L, Xie Y, Zhong G, Liu D, Zhu Y, Li J. (2025). Prevalence of antimicrobial resistance in equine-associated Pseudomonas aeruginosa: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Vet Res, 22(1), 44. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12917-025-05190-0

Publication

BMC veterinary research
ISSN: 1746-6148
NlmUniqueID: 101249759
Country: England
Language: English
Volume: 22
Issue: 1
Pages: 44
PII: 44

Researcher Affiliations

Yang, Luo
  • Dongfangmadu Equine Teaching Hospital, College of Veterinary Medicine, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China.
Xie, Yuxin
  • Dongfangmadu Equine Teaching Hospital, College of Veterinary Medicine, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China.
Zhong, Guangzhi
  • Dongfangmadu Equine Teaching Hospital, College of Veterinary Medicine, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China.
Liu, Dejun
  • State Key Laboratory of Veterinary Public Health and Safety, College of Veterinary Medicine, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China.
Zhu, Yiping
  • Dongfangmadu Equine Teaching Hospital, College of Veterinary Medicine, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China. yipingz@cau.edu.cn.
Li, Jing
  • Dongfangmadu Equine Teaching Hospital, College of Veterinary Medicine, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China. jlivet@cau.edu.cn.
  • State Key Laboratory of Veterinary Public Health and Safety, College of Veterinary Medicine, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China. jlivet@cau.edu.cn.

MeSH Terms

  • Animals
  • Pseudomonas aeruginosa / drug effects
  • Horses
  • Anti-Bacterial Agents / pharmacology
  • Anti-Bacterial Agents / therapeutic use
  • Pseudomonas Infections / veterinary
  • Pseudomonas Infections / microbiology
  • Pseudomonas Infections / drug therapy
  • Pseudomonas Infections / epidemiology
  • Drug Resistance, Bacterial
  • Horse Diseases / microbiology
  • Horse Diseases / drug therapy
  • Horse Diseases / epidemiology
  • Prevalence

Grant Funding

  • 32202861 / National Natural Science Foundation of China

Conflict of Interest Statement

Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: Not applicable. Consent for publication: Not applicable. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

References

This article includes 87 references
  1. Lupo A, Haenni M, Madec JY. Antimicrobial resistance in spp. and spp.. Microbiol Spectr 2018;6:6.3.1.
    doi: 10.1128/microbiolspec.ARBA-0007-2017pmc: PMC11633584pubmed: 30101740google scholar: lookup
  2. Mena KD, Gerba CP. Risk assessment of in water. Reviews of environmental contamination and toxicology 2009;201:71–115.
    pubmed: 19484589
  3. . Antimicrobial resistance surveillance in Europe. .
    doi: 10.2900/112339google scholar: lookup
  4. Pottier M, Castagnet S, Gravey F, Leduc G, Sévin C, Petry S. Antimicrobial resistance and genetic diversity of strains isolated from equine and other veterinary samples. Pathogens 2022;12:64.
    doi: 10.3390/pathogens12010064pmc: PMC9867525pubmed: 36678412google scholar: lookup
  5. Allen JL, Begg AP, Browning GF. Outbreak of equine endometritis caused by a genotypically identical strain of . J Vet Diagn Invest 2011;23:1236–9.
    doi: 10.1177/1040638711425589pubmed: 22362810google scholar: lookup
  6. Omar H, Hambidge M, Firmanes B, Shabandri AM, Wilsher S. Bacteria isolated from equine uteri in the united Arab emirates: a retrospective study. J Equine Vet Sci 2022;115:104029.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2022.104029pubmed: 35659620google scholar: lookup
  7. Zhao Y, Zhu Y, Liu B, Mi J, Li N, Zhao W. Antimicrobial susceptibility of bacterial isolates from donkey uterine infections, 2018–2021. Vet Sci 2022;9:67.
    pmc: PMC8875120pubmed: 35202320
  8. Govan JR, Sarasola P, Taylor DJ, Tatnell PJ, Russell NJ, Gacesa P. Isolation of a mucoid alginate-producing strain from the equine guttural pouch. J Clin Microbiol 1992;30:595–9.
    doi: 10.1128/jcm.30.3.595-599.1992pmc: PMC265116pubmed: 1551975google scholar: lookup
  9. Moore JE, Buckley TC, Millar BC, Gibson P, Cannon G, Egan C. Molecular surveillance of the incidence of and from horses in Ireland by sequence-specific PCR [SS‐PCR]. Equine Vet J 2001;33:319–22.
    doi: 10.2746/042516401776249750pubmed: 11352356google scholar: lookup
  10. Coman D. Horserace betting levy board: codes of practice update. UK-Vet Equine 2022;6:159–62.
    doi: 10.12968/ukve.2022.6.4.159google scholar: lookup
  11. Azam MW, Khan AU. Updates on the pathogenicity status of . Drug Discov Today 2019;24:350–9.
    doi: 10.1016/j.drudis.2018.07.003pubmed: 30036575google scholar: lookup
  12. Fajardo A, Martínez-Martín N, Mercadillo M, Galán JC, Ghysels B, Matthijs S. The neglected intrinsic resistome of bacterial pathogens. PLoS One 2008;3:e1619.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0001619pmc: PMC2238818pubmed: 18286176google scholar: lookup
  13. Alvarez-Ortega C, Wiegand I, Olivares J, Hancock REW, Martínez JL. Genetic determinants involved in the susceptibility of to beta-lactam antibiotics. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2010;54:4159–67.
    doi: 10.1128/AAC.00257-10pmc: PMC2944606pubmed: 20679510google scholar: lookup
  14. Dötsch A, Becker T, Pommerenke C, Magnowska Z, Jänsch L, Häussler S. Genomewide identification of genetic determinants of antimicrobial drug resistance in . Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2009;53:2522–31.
    doi: 10.1128/AAC.00035-09pmc: PMC2687185pubmed: 19332674google scholar: lookup
  15. Botelho J, Grosso F, Peixe L. Antibiotic resistance in – mechanisms, epidemiology and evolution. Drug Resist Updat 2019;44:100640.
    doi: 10.1016/j.drup.2019.07.002pubmed: 31492517google scholar: lookup
  16. Oyardi O, Savage PB, Guzel CB. Effects of ceragenins and antimicrobial peptides on the A549 cell line and an co-culture model of A549 cells and .. Pathogens 2022;11:1044.
    doi: 10.3390/pathogens11091044pmc: PMC9503685pubmed: 36145476google scholar: lookup
  17. Thi MTT, Wibowo D, Rehm BHA. biofilms.. Int J Mol Sci 2020;21:8671.
    doi: 10.3390/ijms21228671pmc: PMC7698413pubmed: 33212950google scholar: lookup
  18. Breidenstein EBM, de la Fuente-Núñez C, Hancock REW. : all roads lead to resistance.. Trends Microbiol 2011;19:419–26.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tim.2011.04.005pubmed: 21664819google scholar: lookup
  19. Afonso AC, Oliveira D, Saavedra MJ, Borges A, Simões M. Biofilms in diabetic foot ulcers: impact, risk factors and control strategies.. Int J Mol Sci 2021;22:8278.
    doi: 10.3390/ijms22158278pmc: PMC8347492pubmed: 34361044google scholar: lookup
  20. Deniaud M, Tee E. Susceptibility pattern of bacterial isolates in equine ulcerative keratitis: implications for empirical treatment at a university teaching hospital in Sydney.. Aust Vet J 2023;101:115–20.
    doi: 10.1111/avj.13221pubmed: 36433648google scholar: lookup
  21. Jinks MR, Miller EJ, Diaz-Campos D, Mollenkopf DF, Newbold G, Gemensky‐Metzler A. Using minimum inhibitory concentration values of common topical antibiotics to investigate emerging antibiotic resistance: a retrospective study of 134 dogs and 20 horses with ulcerative keratitis.. Vet Ophthalmol 2020;23:806–13.
    doi: 10.1111/vop.12801pubmed: 32608547google scholar: lookup
  22. Carstanjen B, Boehart S, Cislakova M. Septic arthritis in adult horses.. Pol J Vet Sci 2010;13:201–12.
    pubmed: 21077452
  23. Ferreira ARDA, Santana AF, Almeida ACDVRD, Sousa RF, Perecmanis S, Galera PD. Bacterial culture and antibiotic sensitivity from the ocular conjunctiva of horses.. Ciênc Rural 2017;47:e20160753.
  24. Stover CK, Pham XQ, Erwin AL, Mizoguchi SD, Warrener P, Hickey MJ. Complete genome sequence of PAO1, an opportunistic pathogen.. Nature 2000;406:959–64.
    doi: 10.1038/35023079pubmed: 10984043google scholar: lookup
  25. Suter A, Voelter K, Hartnack S, Spiess BM, Pot SA. Septic keratitis in dogs, cats, and horses in Switzerland: associated bacteria and antibiotic susceptibility.. Vet Ophthalmol 2018;21:66–75.
    doi: 10.1111/vop.12480pubmed: 28557367google scholar: lookup
  26. Sauer P, Andrew SE, Lassaline M, Gelatt KN, Denis HM. Changes in antibiotic resistance in equine bacterial ulcerative keratitis (1991–2000): 65 horses.. Vet Ophthalmol 2003;6:309–13.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1463-5224.2003.00312.xpubmed: 14641828google scholar: lookup
  27. Gilbertie JM, Schnabel LV, Stefanovski D, Kelly DJ, Jacob ME, Schaer TP. Gram-negative multi-drug resistant bacteria influence survival to discharge for horses with septic synovial structures: 206 cases (2010–2015).. Vet Microbiol 2018;226:64–73.
    doi: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2018.10.009pubmed: 30389045google scholar: lookup
  28. Wright IM, Smith MRW, Humphrey DJ, Eaton-Evans TCJ, Hillyer MH. Endoscopic surgery in the treatment of contaminated and infected synovial cavities.. Equine Vet J 2003;35:613–9.
    doi: 10.2746/042516403775467225pubmed: 14515964google scholar: lookup
  29. Chatterjee A, Modarai M, Naylor NR, Boyd SE, Atun R, Barlow J. Quantifying drivers of antibiotic resistance in humans: A systematic review.. Lancet Infect Dis 2018;18:e368–78.
    doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(18)30296-2pubmed: 30172580google scholar: lookup
  30. Afonso AC, Sousa M, Pinto AR, Cotovio M, Simões M, Saavedra MJ. Biofilm production by critical antibiotic-resistant pathogens from an equine wound.. Animals 2023;13:1342.
    doi: 10.3390/ani13081342pmc: PMC10135353pubmed: 37106905google scholar: lookup
  31. Wilson WD, Baggot JD, Adamson PJ, Hirsh DC, Hietala SK. Cefadroxil in the horse: pharmacokinetics and antibacterial activity.. J Vet Pharmacol Ther 1985;8:246–53.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2885.1985.tb00953.xpubmed: 4057345google scholar: lookup
  32. Léon A, Castagnet S, Maillard K, Paillot R, Giard J-C. Evolution of antimicrobial susceptibility of equine clinical isolates in France between 2016 and 2019.. Animals 2020;10:812.
    doi: 10.3390/ani10050812pmc: PMC7278474pubmed: 32392891google scholar: lookup
  33. Köhne M, Hegger A, Tönissen A, Heusinger A, Hader C, Görgens A. Frequency of potentially pathogenic bacterial and fungal isolates among 28,887 endometrial samples from mares, with an emphasis on multi-drug resistant bacteria in Germany (2018–2022).. J Equine Vet Sci 2024;133:105008.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2024.105008pubmed: 38237703google scholar: lookup
  34. Duchesne R, Castagnet S, Maillard K, Petry S, Cattoir V, Giard J-C. antimicrobial susceptibility of equine clinical isolates from france, 2006–2016.. J Glob Antimicrob Resist 2019;19:144–53.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jgar.2019.03.006pubmed: 30880244google scholar: lookup
  35. Lewis K. Riddle of biofilm resistance.. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2001;45:999–1007.
    doi: 10.1128/AAC.45.4.999-1007.2001pmc: PMC90417pubmed: 11257008google scholar: lookup
  36. Donlan RM. Biofilms: microbial life on surfaces.. Emerg Infect Dis 2002;8:881–90.
    doi: 10.3201/eid0809.020063pmc: PMC2732559pubmed: 12194761google scholar: lookup
  37. Rollet C, Gal L, Guzzo J. Biofilm-detached cells, a transition from a sessile to a planktonic phenotype: a comparative study of adhesion and physiological characteristics in : physiology of biofilm-detached cells and recolonization.. FEMS Microbiol Lett 2008;290:135–42.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6968.2008.01415.xpubmed: 19054076google scholar: lookup
  38. Wu H, Moser C, Wang HZ, Høiby N, Song ZJ. Strategies for combating bacterial biofilm infections.. Int J Oral Sci 2015;7:1–7.
    doi: 10.1038/ijos.2014.65pmc: PMC4817533pubmed: 25504208google scholar: lookup
  39. Almatroudi A. Biofilm resilience: molecular mechanisms driving antibiotic resistance in clinical contexts.. Biol 2025;14:165.
    doi: 10.3390/biology14020165pmc: PMC11852148pubmed: 40001933google scholar: lookup
  40. Omwenga EO, Awuor SO. The bacterial biofilms: formation, impacts, and possible management targets in the healthcare system.. Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol 2024;2024:1542576.
    doi: 10.1155/cjid/1542576pmc: PMC11666319pubmed: 39717533google scholar: lookup
  41. Sahoo K, Meshram S. Biofilm formation in chronic infections: a comprehensive review of pathogenesis, clinical implications, and novel therapeutic approaches.. Cureus 2024;16:e70629.
    pmc: PMC11527504pubmed: 39483571
  42. Uruén C, Chopo-Escuin G, Tommassen J, Mainar-Jaime RC, Arenas J. Biofilms as promoters of bacterial antibiotic resistance and tolerance.. Antibiotics 2020;10:3.
    doi: 10.3390/antibiotics10010003pmc: PMC7822488pubmed: 33374551google scholar: lookup
  43. Huemer M, Mairpady Shambat S, Brugger SD, Zinkernagel AS. Antibiotic resistance and persistence—implications for human health and treatment perspectives.. EMBO Rep 2020;21:e51034.
    doi: 10.15252/embr.202051034pmc: PMC7726816pubmed: 33400359google scholar: lookup
  44. Coenye T, Bové M, Bjarnsholt T. Biofilm antimicrobial susceptibility through an experimental evolutionary lens.. NPJ Biofilms Microbiomes 2022;8:82.
    doi: 10.1038/s41522-022-00346-4pmc: PMC9579162pubmed: 36257971google scholar: lookup
  45. Khan J, Tarar SM, Gul I, Nawaz U, Arshad M. Challenges of antibiotic resistance biofilms and potential combating strategies: a review.. 3 Biotech 2021;11:169.
    doi: 10.1007/s13205-021-02707-wpmc: PMC7966653pubmed: 33816046google scholar: lookup
  46. Jørgensen E, Bjarnsholt T, Jacobsen S. Biofilm and equine limb wounds.. Animals 2021;11:2825.
    doi: 10.3390/ani11102825pmc: PMC8532864pubmed: 34679846google scholar: lookup
  47. Morris LHA, McCue M, Aurich P. Equine endometritis: a review of challenges and new approaches.. Reproduction 2020;160:R95-110.
    doi: 10.1530/REP-19-0478pubmed: 32805710google scholar: lookup
  48. Marchant K, Hendrickson DA, Pezzanite LM. Review of the role of biofilms in equine wounds: clinical indications and treatment strategies.. Equine Vet Educ 2024;36:152–68.
    doi: 10.1111/eve.13919pmc: PMC11376462pubmed: 39246829google scholar: lookup
  49. Lambert PA. Mechanisms of antibiotic resistance in .. J R Soc Med 2002;95:22–6.
    pmc: PMC1308633pubmed: 12216271
  50. Adabi M, Talebi-Taher M, Arbabi L, Afshar M, Fathizadeh S, Minaeian S. Spread of efflux pump overexpressing-mediated fluoroquinolone resistance and multidrug resistance in by using an efflux pump inhibitor.. Infect Chemother 2015;47:98–104.
    doi: 10.3947/ic.2015.47.2.98pmc: PMC4495281pubmed: 26157587google scholar: lookup
  51. Banerjee D, Stableforth D. The treatment of respiratory infection in cystic fibrosis: what drug and which way?. Drugs 2000;60:1053–64.
    doi: 10.2165/00003495-200060050-00006pubmed: 11129122google scholar: lookup
  52. Langendonk RF, Neill DR, Fothergill JL. The building blocks of antimicrobial resistance in : implications for current resistance-breaking therapies.. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 2021;11:665759.
    doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2021.665759pmc: PMC8085337pubmed: 33937104google scholar: lookup
  53. Tenover FC. Mechanisms of antimicrobial resistance in bacteria.. Am J Med 2006;119:S3–10.
    doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2006.03.011pubmed: 16735149google scholar: lookup
  54. Drawz SM, Bonomo RA. Three decades of beta-lactamase inhibitors.. Clin Microbiol Rev 2010;23:160–201.
    doi: 10.1128/CMR.00037-09pmc: PMC2806661pubmed: 20065329google scholar: lookup
  55. Jacoby GA. AmpC β-lactamases.. Clin Microbiol Rev 2009;22:161–82.
    doi: 10.1128/CMR.00036-08pmc: PMC2620637pubmed: 19136439google scholar: lookup
  56. Poole K. : resistance to the max.. Front Microbiol 2011;2:65.
    pmc: PMC3128976pubmed: 21747788
  57. Netzel TC, Jindani I, Hanson N, Turner BM, Smith L, Rand KH. The AmpC inhibitor, Syn2190, can be used to reveal extended-spectrum β-lactamases in .. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2007;58:345–8.
    doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2007.01.017pubmed: 17379469google scholar: lookup
  58. Dos Santos RP, Jacoby T, Goldani LZ. Antimicrobial stewardship lessons: do -sparing agents, such as ertapenem, effectively improve bacterial resistance?. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2010;54:3076–7.
    doi: 10.1128/AAC.00472-10pmc: PMC2897280pubmed: 20554969google scholar: lookup
  59. Livermore DM. Multiple mechanisms of antimicrobial resistance in : our worst nightmare?. Clin Infect Dis 2002;34:634–40.
    doi: 10.1086/338782pubmed: 11823954google scholar: lookup
  60. Okamoto K, Gotoh N, Nishino T. reveals high intrinsic resistance to penem antibiotics: penem resistance mechanisms and their interplay.. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2001;45:1964–71.
    doi: 10.1128/AAC.45.7.1964-1971.2001pmc: PMC90586pubmed: 11408209google scholar: lookup
  61. Eiamphungporn W, Schaduangrat N, Malik AA, Nantasenamat C. Tackling the antibiotic resistance caused by class A β-lactamases through the use of β-lactamase inhibitory protein.. Int J Mol Sci 2018;19:2222.
    doi: 10.3390/ijms19082222pmc: PMC6121496pubmed: 30061509google scholar: lookup
  62. Nicolau DP, Carmeli Y, Crank CW, Goff DA, Graber CJ, Lima ALL. Carbapenem stewardship: does ertapenem affect susceptibility to other carbapenems? A review of the evidence.. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2012;39:11–5.
    doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2011.08.018pubmed: 22047702google scholar: lookup
  63. Zhanel GG, Wiebe R, Dilay L, Thomson K, Rubinstein E, Hoban DJ. Comparative review of the carbapenems.. Drugs 2007;67:1027–52.
    doi: 10.2165/00003495-200767070-00006pubmed: 17488146google scholar: lookup
  64. Lipsky BA, Armstrong DG, Citron DM, Tice AD, Morgenstern DE, Abramson MA. Ertapenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam for diabetic foot infections (SIDESTEP): prospective, randomised, controlled, double-blinded, multicentre trial.. Lancet 2005;366:1695–703.
    doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67694-5pubmed: 16291062google scholar: lookup
  65. Zhanel GG, Johanson C, Embil JM, Noreddin A, Gin A, Vercaigne L. Ertapenem: review of a new carbapenem.. Expert Rev Anti-Infect Ther 2005;3:23–39.
    doi: 10.1586/14787210.3.1.23pubmed: 15757455google scholar: lookup
  66. Villegas MV, Lolans K, Correa A, Kattan JN, Lopez JA, Quinn JP. First identification of isolates producing a KPC-type carbapenem-hydrolyzing β-lactamase.. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2007;51:1553–5.
    doi: 10.1128/AAC.01405-06pmc: PMC1855450pubmed: 17261621google scholar: lookup
  67. Wolter DJ, Khalaf N, Robledo IE, Vázquez GJ, Santé MI, Aquino EE. Surveillance of carbapenem-resistant isolates from puerto rican medical center hospitals: dissemination of KPC and IMP-18 β-lactamases.. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2009;53:1660–4.
    doi: 10.1128/AAC.01172-08pmc: PMC2663076pubmed: 19188398google scholar: lookup
  68. Tomás M, Doumith M, Warner M, Turton JF, Beceiro A, Bou G. Efflux pumps, OprD porin, AmpC β-lactamase, and multiresistance in isolates from cystic fibrosis patients.. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2010;54:2219–24.
    doi: 10.1128/AAC.00816-09pmc: PMC2863613pubmed: 20194693google scholar: lookup
  69. Wang J, Zhou J, Qu T, Shen P, Wei Z, Yu Y. Molecular epidemiology and mechanisms of carbapenem resistance in isolates from Chinese hospitals.. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2010;35:486–91.
    doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2009.12.014pubmed: 20185276google scholar: lookup
  70. Rusu A, Oancea O-L, Donici E, Uncu L. Recent developments in penem antibiotics: structural and therapeutic perspectives.. Molecules 2025;30:2126.
    doi: 10.3390/molecules30102126pmc: PMC12113772pubmed: 40430299google scholar: lookup
  71. Wachino J-I, Doi Y, Arakawa Y. Aminoglycoside resistance.. Infect Dis Clin North Am 2020;34:887–902.
    doi: 10.1016/j.idc.2020.06.002pmc: PMC10927307pubmed: 33011054google scholar: lookup
  72. Saeli N, Jafari-Ramedani S, Ramazanzadeh R, Nazari M, Sahebkar A, Khademi F. Prevalence and mechanisms of aminoglycoside resistance among drug-resistant clinical isolates in Iran.. BMC Infect Dis 2024;24:680.
    doi: 10.1186/s12879-024-09585-6pmc: PMC11232330pubmed: 38982386google scholar: lookup
  73. Jalal S, Ciofu O, Høiby N, Gotoh N, Wretlind B. Molecular mechanisms of fluoroquinolone resistance in isolates from cystic fibrosis patients.. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2000;44:710–2.
    doi: 10.1128/AAC.44.3.710-712.2000pmc: PMC89751pubmed: 10681343google scholar: lookup
  74. Redgrave LS, Sutton SB, Webber MA, Piddock LJV. Fluoroquinolone resistance: mechanisms, impact on bacteria, and role in evolutionary success.. Trends Microbiol 2014;22:438–45.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tim.2014.04.007pubmed: 24842194google scholar: lookup
  75. Li XZ, Livermore DM, Nikaido H. Role of efflux pump(s) in intrinsic resistance of : resistance to tetracycline, chloramphenicol, and norfloxacin.. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1994;38:1732–41.
    doi: 10.1128/AAC.38.8.1732pmc: PMC284630pubmed: 7986003google scholar: lookup
  76. Taylor DE, Chau A. Tetracycline resistance mediated by ribosomal protection.. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1996;40:1–5.
    doi: 10.1128/AAC.40.1.1pmc: PMC163045pubmed: 8787868google scholar: lookup
  77. Leclercq R. Mechanisms of resistance to macrolides and lincosamides: nature of the resistance elements and their clinical implications.. Clin Infect Dis 2002;34:482–92.
    doi: 10.1086/324626pubmed: 11797175google scholar: lookup
  78. Goltermann L, Andersen KL, Johansen HK, Molin S, La Rosa R. Macrolide therapy in infections causes uL4 ribosomal protein mutations leading to high-level resistance.. Clin Microbiol Infect 2022;28:1594–601.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2022.08.003pubmed: 35988850google scholar: lookup
  79. Lyon R, Jones RA, Shropshire H, Aberdeen I, Scanlan DJ, Millard A. Membrane lipid renovation in - implications for phage therapy?. Environ Microbiol 2022;24:4533–46.
    doi: 10.1111/1462-2920.16136pmc: PMC9804370pubmed: 35837865google scholar: lookup
  80. Fernández L, Gooderham WJ, Bains M, McPhee JB, Wiegand I, Hancock REW. Adaptive resistance to the “last hope” antibiotics polymyxin B and colistin in is mediated by the novel two-component regulatory system ParR-ParS.. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2010;54:3372–82.
    doi: 10.1128/AAC.00242-10pmc: PMC2916309pubmed: 20547815google scholar: lookup
  81. Köhler T, Kok M, Michea-Hamzehpour M, Plesiat P, Gotoh N, Nishino T. Multidrug efflux in intrinsic resistance to trimethoprim and sulfamethoxazole in .. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1996;40:2288–90.
    doi: 10.1128/AAC.40.10.2288pmc: PMC163521pubmed: 9036831google scholar: lookup
  82. Eliopoulos GM, Huovinen P. Resistance to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole.. Clin Infect Dis 2001;32:1608–14.
    doi: 10.1086/320532pubmed: 11340533google scholar: lookup
  83. Lister PD, Wolter DJ, Hanson ND. Antibacterial-resistant : clinical impact and complex regulation of chromosomally encoded resistance mechanisms.. Clin Microbiol Rev 2009;22:582–610.
    doi: 10.1128/CMR.00040-09pmc: PMC2772362pubmed: 19822890google scholar: lookup
  84. Fernández M, Conde S, de la Torre J, Molina-Santiago C, Ramos J-L, Duque E. Mechanisms of resistance to chloramphenicol in KT2440.. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2012;56:1001–9.
    doi: 10.1128/AAC.05398-11pmc: PMC3264264pubmed: 22143519google scholar: lookup
  85. Daniels C, Ramos JL. Adaptive drug resistance mediated by root–nodulation–cell division efflux pumps.. Clin Microbiol Infect 2009;15:32–6.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2008.02693.xpubmed: 19220351google scholar: lookup
  86. Nitzan Y, Rushansky NM. Chloramphenicol acetyltransferase from —a new variant of the enzyme.. Curr Microbiol 1981;5:261–5.
    doi: 10.1007/BF01567915google scholar: lookup
  87. Zheng D, Bergen PJ, Landersdorfer CB, Hirsch EB. Differences in fosfomycin resistance mechanisms between and .. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2022;66:e01446-21.
    doi: 10.1128/AAC.01446-21pmc: PMC8846481pubmed: 34807759google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 0 times.
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 106,476 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.