Differentiation of Resistance Phenotypes among Erythromycin-Resistant Pneumococci

Open Access
Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Laboratory differentiation of erythromycin resistance phenotypes is poorly standardized for pneumococci. In this study, 85 clinical isolates of erythromycin-resistant (MIC ≥ 1 μg/ml) Streptococcus pneumoniae were tested for the resistance phenotype by the erythromycin-clindamycin double-disk test (previously used to determine the macrolide resistance phenotype in Streptococcus pyogenes strains) and by MIC induction tests, i.e., by determining the MICs of macrolide antibiotics without and with pre-exposure to 0.05 μg of erythromycin per ml. By the double-disk test, 65 strains, all carrying the erm (AM) determinant, were assigned to the constitutive macrolide, lincosamide, and streptogramin B resistance (cMLS) phenotype, and the remaining 20, all carrying the mef (E) gene, were assigned to the recently described M phenotype; an inducible MLS resistance (iMLS) phenotype was not found. The lack of inducible resistance to clindamycin was confirmed by determining clindamycin MICs without and with pre-exposure to subinhibitory concentrations of erythromycin. In macrolide MIC and MIC-induction tests, whereas homogeneous susceptibility patterns were observed among the 20 strains assigned to the M phenotype by the double-disk test, two distinct patterns were recognized among the 65 strains assigned to the cMLS phenotype by the same test; one pattern ( n = 10; probably that of the true cMLS isolates) was characterized by resistance to rokitamycin also without induction, and the other pattern ( n = 55; designated the iMcLS phenotype) was characterized by full or intermediate susceptibility to rokitamycin without induction turning to resistance after induction, with an MIC increase by more than three dilutions. A triple-disk test, set up by adding a rokitamycin disk to the erythromycin and clindamycin disks of the double-disk test, allowed the easy differentiation not only of pneumococci with the M phenotype from those with MLS resistance but also, among the latter, of those of the true cMLS phenotype from those of the iMcLS phenotype. While distinguishing MLS from M resistance in pneumococci is easily and reliably achieved, the differentiation of constitutive from inducible MLS resistance is far more uncertain and is strongly affected by the antibiotic used to test inducibility.
Keywords