Abstract
Pseudomonas aeruginosa is one of the most common nosocomial pathogens and part of the top emergent species associated with antimicrobial resistance that has become one of the greatest threat to public health in the twenty-first century. This bacterium is provided with a wide set of virulence factors that contribute to pathogenesis in acute and chronic infections. This review aims to summarize the impact of multidrug resistance on the virulence and fitness of P. aeruginosa. Although it is generally assumed that acquisition of resistant determinants is associated with a fitness cost, several studies support that resistance mutations may not be associated with a decrease in virulence and/or that certain compensatory mutations may allow multidrug resistance strains to recover their initial fitness. We discuss the interplay between resistance profiles and virulence from a microbiological perspective but also the clinical consequences in outcomes and the economic impact.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Pseudomonas aeruginosa is one of the top nosocomial pathogens and thus a leading cause of severe hospital-acquired infections, particularly in critically ill and immunocompromised patients [1]. As a proof of its clinical relevance, for instance P. aeruginosa is responsible for approximately 4.7–8.9% of hospital-acquired bloodstream infections and multidrug resistant (MDR) P. aeruginosa responsible of 26.3% of MDR bacteremia [2,3,4],with mortality rates of around 30% [5,6,7].
Different studies have shown that P. aeruginosa infections are associated with worse clinical outcomes than other pathogens [8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15]. To give just one example, Thaden et al. evaluated the impact of bacterial species (Staphylococcus aureus or gram-negative bacteria) on outcome in bloodstream infections in a 13-year prospective study involving more than 2,600 hospitalized patients with bloodstream infection and found a significant association between P. aeruginosa and higher in-hospital mortality compared to other bacteria after adjusting for patient demographics, medical comorbidities, bacterial antibiotic resistance, and treatment factors [16].
A key aspect of the success of P. aeruginosa as an opportunistic pathogen is its extensive genomic complexity and metabolic plasticity, which includes several intrinsic defense mechanisms, an extensive array of virulence genes and biofilm production capacity [17]. Connected to this is the extraordinary capacity of this species to develop and spread antimicrobial resistance in vivo [18, 19].
The worldwide emergence of antimicrobial resistance has become a major public health concern [20]. P. aeruginosa is one of the top six pathogens responsible for resistance-associated deaths [20] and is listed among the ESKAPE pathogens [21]. The WHO lists carbapenem-resistant (CR) P. aeruginosa among the ‘critical priority’ pathogens for which new antibiotics are urgently needed [22].
Regarding P. aeruginosa epidemiology, in a recent study conducted from 2018 to 2022 by the ATLAS (Antimicrobial Testing Leadership and Surveillance) global program, the rates of carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosa varied from 15 to 33% depending on the region. Difficult-to-Treat Resistant P. aeruginosa rates varied from 6% in North America to 12% in Latin America in 2022 and remained stable over time in all global regions, except for a signifcant decreasing trend in isolates from Europe [23]. In the European Union/European Economic Area, the European Center for Disease Control data for 2023–2021 noted considerable differences in the percentages of CR strains, ranging from under 5% in two of 44 reporting countries to equal to or above 50% in 6 countries [24]. As recently as the first decade of this century, the absence of standardized international definitions of the degrees of multidrug resistance made it difficult to contrast the results of different studies, [25]. In 2012, a consensus document was published proposing international definitions of the terms multidrug resistance (MDR) (non-susceptible to ≥ 1 agent in ≥ 3 antimicrobial categories), extensive drug resistance (XDR) (non-susceptible to ≥ 1 agent in all but ≤ 2 categories) and pandrug resistance (PDR) (non-susceptible to all antimicrobial agents) [26]. However, in the case of P. aeruginosa, this proposal has certain limitations, since it was validated before the introduction of the novel β-lactam–β-lactamase inhibitor (BL-BLI) combinations, and the results vary depending on breakpoints used (The European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing—EUCAST or The Clinical & Laboratory Standards Institute- CLSI). Furthermore, the definition of XDR was formulated in terms of the number of antimicrobial categories with resistance but did not differentiate between first and second or third-line antimicrobial agents. In 2018, the IDSA (Infectious Diseases Society of America) proposed a new definition for pathogens with non-susceptibility to all first-line agents called Difficult-to-Treat Resistance (DTR), defined as resistance to all first-line (high efficacy and low toxicity) agents, which, in the case of gram-negative bacteria, meant resistance to fluoroquinolones and to all ß-lactams (including carbapenems) regardless of the susceptibility to the BL-BLI combinations and aminoglycosides [27]. Finally, a recent update by the European Study Group for Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases suggests including 5 new categories, considering that neither the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control nor the IDSA definitions take into consideration the newly approved β-lactams and BL-BLI combinations: ceftolozane/tazobactam, ceftazidime/avibactam, imipenem/relebactam, meropenem/vaborbactam and cefiderocol [28]. In the present review, we use as reference the term DTR P. aeruginosa. However, we maintain the original definitions of the studies named in the manuscript (CR, MDR and XDR) for a better interpretation of the outcomes.
The aim of the present research is to review the impact of multidrug resistance on bacterial virulence and fitness of P. aeruginosa. We discuss the microbiological implications, consequences for clinical outcomes and the economic burden of resistance in P. aeruginosa.
We try to make an integrative review of the resistance-virulence balance from all perspectives, from the basic and molecular research, through topics of molecular epidemiology and implications in large collections of clinical strains, until reaching patient cohorts and outcomes for them. To our knowldege there is no similar review in the literature, which allows to understand all the implications of resistance from the beginning (at the level of bacteria isolated in vitro) to the end (patient).
Virulence factors in Pseudomonas aeruginosa
The virulence of a pathogen is its ability to infect the host and cause clinical symptoms, assisted by factors that promote bacterial adhesion, colonization, invasion of the host tissues, dissemination as well as evasion of the host immune response [31]. P. aeruginosa is endowed with a wide array of virulence factors that contribute to pathogenesis in acute and chronic infections [32], and regulated by complex, interconnected pathways and signaling systems that confer great plasticity to this pathogen [33]. Some of these virulence determinants are in the accessory genome acquired by horizontal gene transfer, which represents at least 10% of the genome, forming part of pathogenicity (PAPI) islands, such as PAPI-1 and PAPI-2 (responsible in part for the hypervirulence of strain PA14) or genomic (PAGI) islands [34,35,36,37].
Virulence determinants include cell-associated and extracellular factors. A list of the most important ones in P. aeruginosa is shown in Table 1.
Regarding cell-associated factors, on the bacterial surface there are appendages, such as flagella and type IV pili, which are the main cell adhesion and motility systems; and exopolysaccharides, also responsible for adhesion to host cells and biofilm formation (including the lipopolysaccharides: alginate and Pel and Psl).
Lipopolysaccharide is a major virulence factor present in many gram-negatives, comprised of lipid A (which anchors the structure in the outer membrane), core oligosaccharide, and O-antigen, which is the most distal element. This factor is a major structural component of the outer membrane, enabling resistance to the complement system, several antimicrobial peptides and toxic compounds, and exhibiting important pro-inflammatory effects. The O antigen has also been used to classify P. aeruginosa isolates [36,37,38] and certain variants are associated with a worse prognosis in respiratory tract (O1 and O11 serotypes) [40, 41] and bloodstream infections (O11 serotype) [29, 42].
Among the extracelular factors are included toxins, elastases, pigments, siderophores (pyoverdine and pyochelin) and other proteases. One of the most important P. aeruginosa virulence determinants is the type III secretion system (T3SS), which injects effector cytotoxins into host cells (ExoS, ExoT, ExoU and ExoY) [43, 44]. These exotoxins disrupt the epithelial barrier and so inhibit cell migration and proliferation, inducing apoptosis [45]. Of the four effector exotoxins identified, ExoU is the most potent as it leads to rapid necrosis of the epithelial barrier [44] and its expression has been associated with higher bacterial virulence and worse clinical outcomes in patients with pneumonia and bacteremia in both clinical and experimental studies [5, 38, 42, 46, 47]. The siderophores (pyoverdine and pyochelin) are produced by the bacterium as iron acquisition systems, vital for its growth and virulence [33, 48,49,50,51].
Exotoxin A is an ADP-ribosyl transferase that inhibits protein synthesis, inducing cell death, cytokine production, and reducing the host’s response to infection. LasA and LasB proteases exhibit elastolytic activity, apromoting degradation of blood vessel and pulmonary alveoli tissues. The alkaline protease and protease IV degrade complement proteins, cytokines (alkaline protease) and host clotting factors (protease IV). The rhamnolipids contribute to the pathogenesis of P. aeruginosa lung infections by degrading alveolar surfactant and participating in ciliostasis [33, 52,53,54].
Finally, quorum sensing, also secreted to the extracellular medium for bacterial cell-to-cell communication, involves the production, detection, and response to signaling molecules called autoinducers, that regulate gene expression, including a myriad of genes responsible for virulence-related behaviour. Thus, this system plays a key role in bacterial virulence, resistance, and biofilm formation [32].
Pseudomonas aeruginosa epidemic high-risk clones
Pseudomonas aeruginosa shows significant clonal diversity, with more than 4,000 multi-locus sequence typing (MLST) profiles described (http://pubmlst.org/paeruginosa) [55]. However, this diversity primarily affects susceptible strains showing a polyclonal non-endemic pattern [56]. In contrast, most P. aeruginosa strains with a MDR/DTR phenotype, belong to a few endemic clones, known as high-risk clones [29, 30]. Multiple reports in recent decades have reported the worldwide spread of these clones [57,58,59], with clones ST235, ST111, and ST175 being the most prevalent globally [29]. These high-risk epidemic clones are characterized by their exceptional ability to acquire resistance determinants through horizontal gene transfer, especially horizontally-acquired-β-lactamases such as extended spectrum β-lactamases (ESBLs) and carbapenemases [28, 29, 60]. Table 2, adapted from del Barrio-Tofiño et al. [60], shows the main virulence characteristics, geographic distribution, and association with the main horizontally-acquired β-lactamases of the most prevalent high-risk clones.
ST235 (O-antigen serotype O11) is considered the most significant high-risk clone with a wide distribution worldwide [29, 58] and is associated with over 60 different β-lactamase variants, including numerous Class A and B carbapenemases. ST111 (serotype O12) has also been documented on every continent except Oceania and is usually associated with the presence of metallo-β-lactamase (MBL) VIM-2. ST175 (serotype O4), is widely distributed in several European countries and Japan, and has a specific chromosomal mutation in AmpR (G154R) that causes hyperproduction of the intrinsic β-lactamase AmpC, OprD (Q142X), and MexZ (G195E), and 3 quinolone resistance-determining region (QRDR) mutations (GyrA T83I, D87N and ParC S87W) [58, 60,61,62].
Other clones less extended are summarized in Table 2.
Different studies have evaluated the pathogenicity [60] and virulence of these high-risk clones [5, 64, 65]. Peña et al. determined that the T3SS genotype and high-risk clones are significantly linked, with specific high-risk clones showing well-defined T3SS genotypes [5]. Clone ST235 is known to have a greater capacity to acquire antibiotic resistance determinants and increased virulence [5, 66]. It is related with the exoU + virulence factor and the O11 serotype [28, 58, 67]. This clone has also been shown to be associated with increased mortality in bloodstream infections compared to other high-risk clones [47, 68]. On the other hand, other prevalent clones, such as ST111 and ST175, show the exoU-genotype and thus lower cytotoxicity, invasiveness, and virulence [62]. Recio et al. found that ST175 strains were associated with particularly low virulence, while the pathogenicity of ST235 strains was similar to that of non-MDR strains, despite exhibiting a wide range of acquired resistance mechanisms. Their findings also lend support to the T3SS genotype as one of the most important virulence determinants, since of the high-risk clones studied, ST235 was the only one with the exoU+ [69]. A Spanish multicenter study by Mulet et al., found that the three major high-risk clones (ST111, ST175, and ST235) were associated with low levels of virulence markers such as motility and pigment production, as well as reduced bacterial fitness, but also with increased spontaneous mutation frequency and biofilm growth, likely enabling a greater capacity for dissemination [70]. Other studies have demonstrated increased biofilm formation, high levels of pyocyanin and decreased motility in high-risk clones [71, 72].
As for the clones typically associated with cystic fibrosis, the most important and the first to be described was the Liverpool epidemic strain, or Clone C [73]. This clone has traditionally been considered non-virulent and differs by only 1 nucleotide from clone ST598 [74, 75]. Another clone widely distributed in patients with cystic fibrosis is ST274 (belonging to the clonal complex, CC274) [76]. This clone is associated with the presence of β-lactamases OXA-486 and PDC-24 genes, the O3 serotype and the exoU- genotype [77].
Balance between antibiotic resistance and fitness/virulence in Pseudomonas aeruginosa: fundamental concepts and basic research
Fitness (also referred to as biological success) is the capacity of bacteria to survive and multiply within a specific niche and has traditionally been measured through growth rate and interbacterial competitive assays. When considering a pathogenic species such as P. aeruginosa causing acute infection, fitness is invariably linked to virulence, since the greater the capacity to infect and disseminate thanks to its virulence factors, the more likely it is to thrive inside the host, and vice versa [78, 79]. Given this close relationship, here we shall use fitness and virulence interchangeably, and the terms biological cost (or burden) and virulence attenuation as synonyms although we know that strictly speaking, they are not. Therefore, we will use them in a sensu lato conception to simplify the complex connection with resistance and make the reading easier. In other words, both if a bacterium grows slower in vitro or if it shows a very specific toxin hypo-expression for instance, the general outcome would be similar: an infection less harmful for the host. In any case, when in this section the consequences for biological success linked to each resistance mechanism are approached, we tried to deeply dissect them, clearly stating if attenuation is due to a general fitness impairment or linked to specific downregulations of pathogenesis-related features, which substracts importance of our indistinct use of concepts. However, it must be clarified that the analysis of the interplay between resistance and fitness/virulence we make here is referred to the acute infection context, because in the chronic infection (e.g. cystic fibrosis), this interplay is much more complex and particular. For instance, in this chronic scenario certain features such as slow growth and pathogenic attenuation are often positively selected, although these traits are deleterious if applied to acute infection [80]. Thus, the balance between antibiotic resistance and biological success in chronic respiratory infections is a very particular topic that would deserve an especially dedicated review and will not be considered in this manuscript.
Although it has been accepted for years that there is inevitably some fitness cost associated with acquired resistance in the context of acute infection, this assumption is not so clear-cut in reality [79, 81,82,83]. The view is based on the fact that an acquired mutation or horizontal determinant often has negative side effects for bacterial biology, such as alterations in antibiotic targets leading to decreased protein efficiency, increased energetic costs associated with the (hyper)production of enzymes that inactivate the antibiotic, unwanted extrusion of certain useful compounds in addition to the drug, reduced nutrient uptake because of porin loss, etc. This assumption justifies the research interest in looking closely at resistance and fitness with the ultimate goal of discovering therapeutic targets to reduce the pathogenic power of bacteria and/or hinder the emergence of resistance by taking advantage of the potentially high associated biological costs [30, 84]. However, as will be seen below, there are multiple examples of cases where there appears to be no biological burden, either because the acquired mechanisms themselves appear to be cost-free, or compensatory mutations are selected, or even because other markers of increased virulence are co-carried with the acquired resistance gene on mobile genetic elements [81, 85, 86]. There are several studies with clinical strains or mutants evolved in vitro, in which the resistance phenotype is treated as the end result of a combination of mechanisms, but it is very difficult to establish direct cause-effect relationships between specific resistance pathways and biological costs in these studies. In this section on the other hand, we review the resistance/fitness trade-off from a molecular perspective, collecting data in which different resistance mechanisms and their respective biological burdens are addressed separately. Thus, here we take a close look at the main knowledge in the field of basic research on the connection between resistance and fitness/virulence in P. aeruginosa, dividing the topic into horizontally-acquired versus mutation-driven resistance for ease of understanding. Subsequently, the clinical perspective of the interplay between resistance and virulence in P. aeruginosa will also be addressed to provide an integrated overview of the topic.
Horizontally-acquired resistance
It has to be considered that the biological cost associated to horizontal resistance genes may be often due to the the carrier elements (usually plasmids) themselves rather than to the specific resistance determinant. However, since multiple factors could determine the cost of each particular plasmid [87,88,89] (size, copy number, codified genes, or even compensatory features such as pathogenicity islands, etc.), to simplify the approach in this section we dissect the knowledge about the biological burden, apparently specific, associated to the main horizontally-acquired determinants.
The paradigmatic example of horizontally-acquired resistance is the incorporation of β-lactamases—typically encoded by genes in class I integrons—carried on mobile elements such as plasmids, although few studies have specifically analyzed their associated biological costs. The results in this regard are variable, ranging from β-lactamases for which no associated attenuation was observed to others manifesting significant measurable impairment of fitness/virulence linked to certain enzymes. Among the former, some examples can be cited, such as the class B carbapenemases IMP-1 and VIM-1, the class A penicillinase PSE-1, the class A extended-spectrum β-lactamase [ESBL] GES-1, the class C cephamycinases FOX-4 and FOX-8, and the narrow spectrum class D OXA-2 enzyme [90,91,92] Conversely, other β-lactamases have been shown to entail important burdens, such as the case of class A TEM-1 and class D OXA-3 enzyme production, which triggered impaired twitching motility, adhesion, and biofilm formation by P. aeruginosa without affecting its growth [93]. More recently, production of the OXA-2-derived ESBLs, OXA-226, OXA-161 and especially OXA-539, was shown to be associated with significantly attenuated virulence in an invertebrate model [92]. Although the underlying basis for these high burdens has not been fully determined, some possible explanations have been advanced. For instance, given the likely common origin with ancestral enzymes showing peptidoglycan-lytic activity, it was proposed that some β–lactamase variants could still display certain capacity to metabolize the own cell wall nowadays [87, 94]. Thus, in addition to hydrolyzing the β–lactam drug, in certain circumstances these β-lactamases could be weakening the cell wall by partially degrading it, which would impair cell viability, obviously entailing a great biological burden. Moreover, this residual activity could affect the peptidoglycan-derived molecules, altering the pool of soluble fragments and triggering a downregulation of pathogenesis through appropriate regulators, similar to what happens with AmpR and the muropeptide-linked modulation of AmpC β-lactamase expression [95]. The fact that a functional active site of TEM-1 was required to cause the abovementioned biological burden associated to its production [93], would support the idea of a residual peptidoglycan-degrading activity being the key for this outcome, although other explanations have not been ruled out.
From the abovementioned data, it can be concluded that most of the relevant horizontally-acquired β–lactamases have not yet been analyzed from the perspective of their impact on fitness/virulence. However, considering the worldwide epidemic dissemination of certain enzymes (including OXA-10, PER-1, NDM-1, KPC-2, VIM-2, certain GES-type ESBLs/carbapenemases, among many others), which are often associated with successful high-risk clones, it may be assumed that their costs must be low overall if these associated costs were high, these enzymes would not be so globally widespread [28, 60]. By the same token, a very high cost linked to specific amino acid variants (the aforementioned OXA-539 for instance) [92] would explain their lack of epidemiological success despite the increased capacity for β–lactam hydrolysis. In any case, the possibility of some connections between certain high-risk clones and quite specific β–lactamases being caused by particular traits of the strain but not by the absence of biological cost associated to each β–lactamase per se has not been ruled out. Thus, the opposite phenomenon cannot be discarded either, i.e. that some β-lactamase variants such as the abovementioned OXA-2 derived ESBLs could globally disseminate in future if they get to be acquired by high-risk clones in which the fitness costs of these enzymes may be minor. Although this interesting topic has been approached in Escherichia coli [96], and was shown to explain why some β-lactamases are seemingly limited to certain species and absent in others (e.g. VIM-2 and SPM-1 in Acinetobacter baumannii [97]) remains to be investigated in P. aeruginosa, posing an interesting field worth to be opened.
Athough besides β-lactamases the acquisition of aminoglycoside-modifying enzymes in class I integrons is a typical hallmark of P. aeruginosa clinical strains [98], the topic of their potential biological costs has been never investigated in this species. Therefore, although a presumable low burden can be deduced (if it was high, these enzymes would not be that disseminated) whether these determinants entail different costs depending on the family (N-acetyltransferases, O-nucleotidyltransferases and O-phosphotransferases) and/or the host strain are questions that remain to be approached in future. Conversely, recent work has studied the biological cost associated with the horizontally-acquired colistin resistance determinant, Mcr-1 (in which the addition of phosphoethalonamine to lipopolysaccharide reducing colistin affinity for its target), revealing a lack of impact on fitness/virulence in P. aeruginosa [99]. This represents a red flag for the potential dissemination of this determinant in P. aeruginosa (at the moment, this mechanism is much more prevalent in Enterobacteriaceae), threatening the future antipseudomonal effectiveness of this drug of last resort.
Mutation-driven resistance
With respect to mutation-driven resistance, probably the most important mechanism in P. aeruginosa is hyperproduction of chromosomal AmpC cephalosporinases, which affects 3rd- and 4th-generation cephalosporins, as well as antipseudomonal penicillins and monobactams. Different mutations in genes related to peptidoglycan metabolism cause this hyperproduction [48], with no demonstrable biological burden associated with the two most common pathways, namely, disruption of the ampD and dacB genes [100]. On the other hand, when AmpC hyperproduction was combined with presence of a PSE-1 enzyme in a murine infection model, dramatic attenuation was reported [91], suggesting that AmpC hyperproduction in itself is a very potent, cost-free resistance mechanism and may have deleterious effects only when combined with certain other circumstances [91, 100]. In this context, it was recently shown that the burden of AmpC hyperproduction occurring only in very particular scenarios (peptidoglycan recycling blockade) is dependent on enzymatic activity and reinforces the idea that the abovementioned residual peptidoglycanase activity in certain β-lactamases may be a key contributor to impaired fitness/virulence [92, 100,101,102]. In fact, this need for an intact active site had been already shown for TEM-1 [93], supporting the idea of a partial degradation of the own murein sacculus due to this residual activity, as the cause of cell viability impairment and the necessarily derived fitness cost. Obviously, blocking an essential pipeline for the production of new material to be incorporated into nascent peptidoglycan, as are the recycling routes, would further weaken the cell wall revealing or exaggerating the biological costs [100, 101]. These outcomes could be also caused by the residual peptidoglycanase activity acting on a presumptive pathogenesis regulatory muropeptide pool [95] and not only on the peptidoglycan as rigid structure, as abovementioned for certain horizontally acquired β-lactamases [92, 93].
As a result of the selective pressure exerted by the new drug combinations ceftolozane/tazobactam and ceftazidime/avibactam, there are increasing reports of certain amino acid variants appearing in chromosomal AmpC causing resistance to these antimicrobials when combined with hyperproduction [103]. Of these, only the T96I, G183D and ΔG229-E247 variants have been analyzed from a fitness/virulence perspective and have been shown not to increase costs relative to wildtype AmpC values [100]. In contrast, hyperproduction driven by an amino acid change (G154R) in the master AmpC regulator, AmpR, has been shown to contribute to reduced virulence in the Caenorhabditis elegans model, which is consistent with the fact that AmpR apparently governs the expression of certain virulence-related genes [104, 105]. However, taking into account that this AmpR variant is very closely linked to the high-risk clone ST175 (see "Pseudomonas aeruginosa epidemic high-risk clones" section), it is likely that the increased resistance to β–lactams that it affords more than compensates for the associated cost.
The mutation driven loss of the OprD porin, which confers increased resistance to carbapenems, has been associated with remarkably hypervirulent behavior, including increased cytotoxicity towards macrophages and lethality in mice, although the underlying basis for this phenomenon has not yet been resolved [106, 107]. Other studies of the same mechanism in murine models however have shown a slight reduction in fitness [91, 108], suggesting that the contradictions in these studies may be due to differences in the P. aeruginosa strains used and the fitness/virulence-related parameters analyzed.
Hyperexpression of efflux pumps is one of the most important resistance mechanisms in P. aeruginosa and affects practically all antipseudomonal drugs. The major efflux pumps in this context are MexAB-OprM, MexCD-OprJ, MexEF-OprN and MexXY-OprM, forming a complex modulatory system made up of different regulators with mutation profiles driving hyperproduction in each of them [109]. From the point of view of fitness/virulence, MexCD-OprJ hyperproduction, mediated by mutations in its nfxB repressor, seems to be clearly associated with attenuated virulence [110,11,112,113]. In the case of MexEF-OprN hyperexpression, deletion of this pump resulted in a corresponding increase in virulent behavior, with improved collagenase activity, rhamnolipid production and swarming motility, although the underlying basis of this hypervirulence is not fully understood [111, 114,115,116,117,118,119,120,121].
The information relating to MexAB-OprM is conflicting, with some data showing a significant biological burden [122, 123] contrasting with other results in which pump hyperexpression was associated with enhanced virulence [119, 124]. Of a similar contradictory nature, both MexXY-OprM hyperexpression and its deletion led to significant impaired virulence, including cell invasiveness and pyoverdine production, which once again demonstrates the complexity of the interplay between resistance and virulence [125, 126]. In general, attenuated virulence in the aforementioned pumps has been related to decreased release of extracellular factors such as proteases, elastase, pyocyanin and rhamnolipids (linked in turn to swarming motility) as well as impaired performance of the T3SS. A common explanation for the attenuated virulence often reported to be associated with hyperexpression of efflux pumps is that, in addition to extrusion of the antibiotics, the pumps are also expelling the quorum sensing signals (and thus decreasing their intracellular concentrations) needed for efficient production of different virulence factors [110,111,112,113,114,115,116, 118,119,120, 122, 123, 125].
DNA gyrase consists of two subunits encoded by the gyrA and gyrB genes, whereas the topoisomerase IV subunits are encoded by parC and parE. These proteins, which are involved in the DNA relaxation/coiling processes necessary for replication, are the targets of quinolones. Hence, certain amino acid changes in their sequences are associated with lower binding affinity of the drug for their targets and related resistance, which explains why they are known as Quinolone Resistance-Determining Regions (QRDR) [127]. The burden associated with certain QRDR mutations has been studied, and it has been shown that, in general, low levels of quinolone resistance are mostly cost-free, whereas the highest levels require sequential mutations in the mentioned genes, which obviously leads to increased biological costs. These have been linked to alterations in DNA supercoiling levels, consistent with impaired DNA gyrase and/or topoisomerase IV action [128]. However, it has been shown that the burden associated with QRDR mutations can be readily alleviated by compensatory mutations at different sites [83, 128]. Interestingly, it has been suggested that the T3SS toxin ExoU may better regulate DNA supercoiling, which relieves the burden associated with QRDR mutations [129], and would explain the reported correlation between the presence of this toxin and the high prevalence of QRDR mutations in exoU+ clinical strains [130].
In P. aeruginosa, the main mechanism of colistin (polymyxin E) resistance is the addition of 4-amino-4-deoxy-l-arabinose to lipopolysaccharide, which is associated with mutations in different two-component systems leading to overexpression of the arnBCADTEF operon, which encodes aminoarabinosylation enzymes [131]. It was recently shown that aminoarabinosylation in itself (achieved by cloning and constitutive hyperexpression of the enzymes involved) has a negligible impact on P. aeruginosa fitness and virulence [132]. However, it has also been shown that after 21 days of exposure to colistin in a morbidostat device, resistant mutants displayed other side effects such as improved serum resistance and biofilm formation, but decreased insect larvae killing capacity, demonstrating the complex implications of colistin resistance [133]. Closely related to colistin and in this same latter sense, it was shown that polymyxin B resistance development (whose mechanisms were not determined) was associated with a significant attenuation of P. aeruginosa virulence in the invertebrate model used, but this outcome was only seen in a DNA repair-deficient hypermutator strain (mutS KO mutant), not in the wildtype background [134].
A final example that contradicts the oversimplistic view that resistance usually carries biological costs is the mutational disruption of glpT (that encodes the transporter that enables fosfomycin uptake) which had no measurable effect on impaired fitness or even an increased pathogenic response, in parallel to fosfomycin resistance [106, 135, 136].
Balance between antibiotic resistance and fitness/virulence in Pseudomonas aeruginosa: collections of clinical strains and animal models
In the previous section we reviewed the interplay between resistance and biological burden from a molecular perspective, focusing on specific resistance mechanisms. In this section, we review other studies that have analyzed the interplay between resistance profiles and virulence in clinical strains from the more general point of view of resistance as the final outcome (not considering specific mechanisms). In this section, we consider both in vivo models and in vitro studies performed with clinical strains of P. aeruginosa.
Clinical strains
Focusing on the clinical strains, many authors have attempted to clarify the association between different virulence factors and MDR/XDR profiles. Studies are summarized in Table 3.
As mentioned above, several studies with clinical strains suggest that the T3SS genotype, [5, 69, 137] and the serotypes [42, 138, 139], are key virulence factors in P. aeruginosa. Particularly, the exoU genotype is the major virulence determinant of P. aeruginosa [5, 38, 42, 46, 47, 69, 140].
Different studies have explored the relationship between other virulence determinants and antimicrobial resistance phenotypes reaching different conclusions. Regarding the ability to produce pigments such as pyocyanin some studies found a negative correlation between MDR profile and pyocyanin production [141, 142] while others did not find association between the resistance phenotype and the pyocyanin production [70, 143,144,145]. Other virulence determinants such as motility or alginate production were also analysed, but contradictory results were observed regarding the association of these virulence determinants and the resistance pattern [141, 144,145,146] as it is shown in Table 3.
With specific reference to the activity of virulence factors conventionally described as highly dependent on quorum sensing (elastase, alkaline protease, pyocyanin and biofilm production), in a single center restrospective study was analyzed the relationship between these and antimicrobial susceptibility in respiratory isolates and was found that those that tested negative for virulence factor production were predominantly more resistant to antimicrobials [148].
Finally, numerous studies have analyzed the relationship between biofilm production and resistance with some studies that found a correlation between MDR/XDR resistance profile and a higher ability to biofilm formation [144, 147, 149] and others showing no correlation between the resistance profile and the biofilm formation [143, 146, 150] or even a negative correlation [151].
These conflicting results in the resistance profiles of clinical strains one more time highlight the significant complexity in the relationship between resistance and virulence.
Animal models
In vitro investigations of human pathogens do not always replicate natural conditions, and the expression of virulence factors is not the same when cultured in vitro as in animals or humans. As a result, animal models have become a valuable tool for advancing our knowledge of P. aeruginosa pathogenesis and host–pathogen interactions as well as for the development and evaluation of new therapies [152, 153]. Although some studies involving animal models have been already mentioned in previous paragraph, in this section we bring together the most important studies dealing with virulence-resistance interplay in P. aeruginosa, in which animal models play a key role.
With respect to vertebrate models, Giamarellos-Bourboulis et al. have used experimental models observing higher mortality, stimulation of innate immunity and bacterial load in infections caused by susceptible strains than by MDR strains [154,155,156].
The authors suggested that their findings may support the idea that some of the differences in virulence between MDR and susceptible P. aeruginosa can be attributed to interactions with the innate immune system. Similar results were found by Gómez-Zorrilla et al. [64, 157].
In general, susceptible P. aeruginosa strains induced a higher inflammatory response than MDR strains, but even strains with a similar resistance phenotype induced different responses. Although their data suggested that there was a fitness cost associated with multidrug resistance, the magnitude of the inflammatory response was the result not only of the resistance phenotype but also of the virulence phenotype. The expression of virulence factors not only affects the virulence of P. aeruginosa but also alters the magnitude of the host–pathogen interaction, accounting for the differences in the elicited inflammatory response [157].
Recently, a study has evaluated the usefulness of a machine learning approach to predict P. aeruginosa virulence in a mouse model of bloodstream infection based on genomic content, using a training set of P. aeruginosa bacteremia isolates. Authors showed that the core genome, alone or in combination with the accessory genome, is predictive of virulence. Thus, the machine learning analyses performed in this study could serve as a framework for further investigation of the relationship between bacterial genomes and their phenotype [159].
As an alternative to the vertebrate models, studies are increasingly being conducted in invertebrate models such as the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster, the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans, and the wax moth Galleria mellonella [160, 161]. C. elegans studies are a promising model for studying developmental biology and host–pathogen interactions [162,163,164,165]. In this regard, Recio et al. found that the virulence of the P. aeruginosa strains they studied correlated significantly with the non-MDR and MDR phenotype, exoU+ and exoS+ genotypes, O4 and O11 serotypes and the ST175 high-risk clone [69]. Sánchez-Diener et al. documented a clear negative correlation between antimicrobial resistance and virulence by testing a large collection of well-characterized P. aeruginosa isolates from different sources (bloodstream infections, nosocomial outbreaks, cystic fibrosis and environmental samples) in a C. elegans infection model. The lowest virulence was linked to XDR profiles, but virulence varied considerably depending on the high-risk clone involved, being high for ST111 and ST235, but very low for ST175. The highest virulence of ST235 could well be attributed to its exoU + T3SS genotype, linked to higher virulence in the C. elegans model, as well as in previous clinical studies [104]. Therefore, they suggested that the global transcriptional regulator AmpR could be involved in modulating bacterial pathogenicity as shown in previous works [105, 166]. The same authors investigated the impact of virulence phenotype on mortality in 593 P. aeruginosa bloodstream isolates recovered from a prospective Spanish multicenter study in order to assess the predictive value of C. elegans lethality as a prognostic marker. Their results indicated that the virulence phenotype of P. aeruginosa (specifically in the C. elegans model) correlated with virulence genotype (T3SS) and resistance profile but was a poor prognostic marker of mortality in bloodstream infections [167]. On the other hand, previous studies by Miyata and collaborators determined that the greater wax moth caterpillar G. mellonella is also a suitable invertebrate model host for studying the role of T3SS in P. aeruginosa pathogenesis [161]. Moreover, a very good correlation in the virulence outputs showed by 32 different P. aeruginosa strains when comparing G. mellonella with murine models was also found in another study, demonstrating the validity of this invertebrate model [168].
Clinical impact of multidrug resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections
The clinical impact of multidrug resistance in P. aeruginosa is not only determined by bacterium-related factors, as reviewed in the sections above, but also by factors related to antimicrobial therapy, as well as host-dependent factors such as immune response. Against this background, it is difficult to determine the exact direct relationship between multidrug resistance and clinical outcomes. While it is generally assumed that infections caused by MDR microorganisms are associated with worse outcomes [169,170,171,172], these worse outcomes could be associated with treatment and/or host factors, rather than factors directly associated with bacteria.
With respect to the treatment, one of the main consequences of MDR/DTR infections is the challenge of selecting an appropriate empirical antibiotic therapy. Infections caused by MDR/DTR P. aeruginosa are associated with an increased risk of the patient receiving inappropriate empirical therapy and delayed appropriate antimicrobial therapy [173, 174]. It is well demonstrated that delayed appropriate empirical antimicrobial therapy and decreased antibiotic effectiveness are associated with increased mortality [1, 12, 175,176,177]. In addition, antimicrobial therapies used for MDR/DTR infections may be less effective than those used to treat susceptible infections, often requiring second-line antimicrobial agents or suboptimal treatments [178].
With respect to the host, MDR/ DTR-P. aeruginosa infections usually occur in severely ill patients with multiple underlying diseases, frequently associated with longer hospitalization or previous ICU admissions. These factors may explain, at least in part, the worse outcome of MDR/DTR-infections [179,180,181,182]. In one of the largest studies evaluating the impact of carbapenem resistance on 30-day mortality, Peña et al. demonstrated that carbapenem resistance was associated with significantly increased 30-day mortality rates but that the relationship depended on the degree of baseline severity [183]. Thus, patients with infections due to multidrug-resistant microorganisms tend to have more comorbidities, which may lead to higher mortality [12].
Although a number of studies over the years have compared the different outcomes for infections caused by susceptible and multidrug-resistant strains, the question of whether infections caused by multidrug-resistant microorganisms lead to worse outcomes than those caused by susceptible ones is still being debated. Table 4 lists and summarizes the main previous studies conducted to evaluate differences in clinical outcome between susceptible and drug-resistant P. aeruginosa infections according to source of infection [bacteremia, pneumonia, and urinary tract infection (UTI)], there are conflicting results with some studies suggesting that MDR infections are associated with increased mortality and others showing the opposite.
Apart from relevant clinical variables and inappropriate empirical therapy, different studies have identified an association between antimicrobial resistance and worse clinical prognosis in bloodstream infections [6, 42, 183,184,185,186,187,188,189,190,191,192,193]. In other studies, however the MDR/DTR phenotype was not associated with poor prognosis in bloodstream infections [183, 196,197,198,199].
With respect to respiratory tract infections, most studies have analyzed outcomes in ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). Although some reported correlations between different resistant microorganisms other than P. aeruginosa and mortality [200,201,202,203,204], other studies observed worse clinical outcomes associated with MDR pathogens, such as longer intensive care unit (ICU) stay, prolonged duration of mechanical ventilation (MV) and higher rates of microbial persistence, but no impact on mortality [205,206,207]. Concerning MDR/DTR P. aeruginosa infections, associations with longer duration of MV, longer ICU stay and longer delay to appropriate antimicrobial therapy administration have also been noted, but with no significant differences in treatment failure and/or death [208,209,210,211,212,213].
In terms of UTI, few studies have analyzed infection outcomes according to P. aeruginosa resistance patterns. In two retrospective studies it was found that the MDR phenotype was not associated with in-hospital and all-cause late mortality [215, 216].
Regarding the association of virulence determinants and resistance profiles, not many studies have investigated its impact on clinical outcomes. In a multicenter study previously mentioned by Peña et al., including 593 P. aeruginosa bloodstream infections, was investigated the interplay between the T3SS genotypes (exoS, exoT, exoU and exoY genes), the MDR phenotypes, and the influence in mortality. It was observed that exoS + isolates were more frequently MDR than exoU + isolates and exoU genotype was positively related to the moderately resistant phenotype and negatively linked to the XDR phenotype. They found that early mortality was associated with exoU + isolates and late mortality was not conditioned by the T3SS genotype but was independently associated with the MDR phenotype [5]. These results support that T3SS genotype is the most important virulence determinant in P. aeruginosa and exoU + is associated with worse clinical otucomes. Jeong et al. also analyzed, in a study conducted in Korea, the impact of virulence factors on clinical outcomes in 63 CR bacteremia strains. They found that the capacity of the strain to form biofilm was an independent predictive factor for mortality. In addition, the biofilm-forming ability and elastase activity of strains were correlated with the severity of the infection (determined by the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score) [217].
Economic burden of multidrug resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections
Apart from their clinical impact and threat to patient health, P. aeruginosa infections and the interplay between resistance and virulence are associated with significant burden and cost, which are worth reviewing here. The additional cost of a single case of P. aeruginosa infection for example has been estimated to be approximately 18–19,000 Euros [218, 219].
Antimicrobial-resistant infections have been shown to be associated with a higher economic burden compared to those caused by susceptible strains. In a recent meta-analysis and systematic review of the economic cost of resistance (P. aeruginosa was among the three most studied bacteria), the attributable cost of resistant infection ranged from − US$2,371.4 to + US$29,289.1 per patient episode, the mean excess length of stay was 7.4 days, and the odds ratio of readmission for patients with resistant infection was 49.2% higher than for those with susceptible strains [220].
For patients with MDR P. aeruginosa nosocomial infections, the total mean economic cost per admission is higher than for those with non-resistant strains (15,265 vs. 4933 Euros) [221]. For respiratory infections, in a U.S. study, the excess cost per case was US$22,370, the average adjusted excess length of stay was 6.7 days and the adjusted readmission rate was 16.2% versus 11.1% in non MDR infections [222]. Carbapenem-resistant compared to carbapenem-susceptible P. aeruginosa infections are also associated with longer median length of stay, higher total hospital costs (median $6082.0 vs $4954.2) and daily hospital costs (median $236.1 vs $223.6) [223, 224]. Meanwhile, a recent retrospective multicenter study in China analyzing the clinical and economic burden of CR infection or colonization caused by Klebsiella pneumoniae, P. aeruginosa and Acinetobacter baumannii found that the CR phenotype was related to increased total hospital cost in all microorganisms ($4605 in CR P. aeruginosa) and excess length of stay (5.4 days in CR P. aeruginosa) [225].
Finally, it should be also noted the consequences associated with the high cost of the newly antimicrobials introduced in the market for difficult to treat infections or those expected to be approved in the future. In a recent study estimating the annual incremental costs of treating, among others, difficult-to-treat Gram-negative bacteria with new drugs in US hospitalized patients, was estimated that the cost of a 14-day course for MDR P.aeruginosa was doubled with new drugs; and the annual incremental costs of treating difficult-to-treat Gram-negative bacteria ranged from 30 million to over 500 million US$ [226]. This situation is especially worrisome in lower-middle and low-income countries where the clinical and economic impact of antimicrobial resistance is more pronounced [227, 228] and the access to healthcare facilities and new antimicrobials is limited [229].
Therefore, although the question of the clinical consequences of resistant P. aeruginosa infections, particularly the impact on mortality, remains open (with many different studies showing conflicting and controversial results, as shown above), the evidence that antibiotic-resistant infections have a much greater economic impact on healthcare systems is overwhelming. Further research is needed therefore to optimize antimicrobial use and control strategies for multidrug-resistant infections.
Conclusions
Although it has been shown that MDR/DTR P. aeruginosa is associated with an increased economic burden, attributable to prolonged length of stay and higher average total costs, the topic of the biological implications of antibiotic resistance for virulence and fitness in P. aeruginosa, and thus for patient outcome, is currently debated. As we explained above, although it is generally assumed that acquisition of resistant determinants is associated with a fitness cost, several studies support that resistance mutations may not be associated with a decrease in virulence and/or that certain compensatory mutations may allow MDR/DTR strains to recover their initial fitness. Nonethless, mutations also can have environment effects by increasing or decreasing fitness under certain conditions, for example influenced by the antimicrobial treament or the host. Therefore, environmental variability may modify the tendency to compensatory mutations if the fitness of resistance mutations differs among settings.
For the clinical consequences of MDR/DTR infections, it is difficult to establish a direct association between MDR/DTR profile and mortality attributable to the infection. Conflicting results for the clinical outcomes of MDR/DTR P. aeruginosa infections have been reported, with different possible explanations for the inconsistent results, including treatment and host-dependent factors. Patients with MDR/DTR infections are at increased risk of receiving inappropriate empirical antibiotic therapy and alternative therapies (second-line treatments) that are less effective than those used for treating non-MDR infections. In addition, host-dependent factors associated with MDR/DTR infections may also partly explain the worse outcome in these patients, as these infections usually occur in patients with severe preexisting comorbidities, more severe illnesses and longer prior hospital stays. Certain methodological limitations, such as the retrospective study design or studies with small sample sizes may also act as biases. Consequently, further studies are needed to clarify the real effect of infections caused by MDR and DTR P. aeruginosa.
In terms of the basic knowledge reviewed here, a number of conclusions can be drawn. The first is that the interplay between resistance and virulence is highly complex, and is reflected in the remarkable occurrence of results that contradict each other for specific resistance mechanisms. Complexity is also reflected in the variability of costs depending on the mechanism: high burden vs innocuous vs enhancement of virulence. Second, from the information collected, it can also be gathered that, although a lot of data is available, there are several gaps in knowledge. To give some examples, the field of compensatory evolution associated with different resistance mechanisms appears not to be well studied in P. aeruginosa. Another gap that has not been filled is determination of the specific burden associated with most horizontally acquired β-lactamases, as well as of the mechanisms determining resistance to newly introduced drugs (ceftolozane/tazobactam, imipenem/relebactam, ceftazidime/avibactam and cefiderocol) or those likely to be approved in the near future (aztreonam/avibactam, cefepime/zidebactam or cefepime/taniborbactam) [230]. A holistic approach is required to understand all aspects of the balance between resistance and fitness/virulence in P. aeruginosa, including basic research and clinical perspectives. Deep knowledge of the topic is essential to find anti-virulence targets, and to understand the intricate landscape of the co-evolution of resistance and virulence in the context of acute infection. This could help to understand how individual antibiotic resistance mechanisms fine-tune P. aeruginosa virulence-related behavior thereby making it possible to predict modulation in the pathogenesis of infection and the consequences for the patient along over time, knowledge that can be exploited to good effect in clinical practice [231]. It is anticipated that opening up or digging deeper into the fields of research mentioned above will be of great help in combating one of the greatest challenges to public health in the twenty-first century, namely, P. aeruginosa resistance.
Data availability
No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.
References
Kang C, et al. Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteremia: risk factors for mortality and influence of delayed receipt of effective antimicrobial therapy on clinical outcome. Clin Infect Dis. 2003;37:745–51. https://doi.org/10.1086/377200.
Diekema DJ, et al. The microbiology of bloodstream infection: 20-year trends from the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.00355-19.
Sader HS, Castanheira M, Streit JM, Flamm RK. Frequency of occurrence and antimicrobial susceptibility of bacteria isolated from patients hospitalized with bloodstream infections in United States medical centers (2015–2017). Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2019;95:114850. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2019.06.002.
Jarlier V, et al. Strong correlation between the rates of intrinsically antibiotic-resistant species and the rates of acquired resistance in gram-negative species causing bacteraemia, EU/EEA, 2016. Eurosurveillance. 2019. https://doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2019.24.33.1800538.
Peña C, et al. Influence of virulence genotype and resistance profile in the mortality of Pseudomonas aeruginosa bloodstream infections. Clin Infect Dis. 2015;60:539–48. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciu866.
Tumbarello M, et al. Multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa bloodstream infections: risk factors and mortality. Epidemiol Infect. 2011;139:1740–9. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0950268810003055.
Ammerlaan HSM, et al. Secular trends in nosocomial bloodstream infections: antibiotic-resistant bacteria increase the total burden of infection. Clin Infect Dis. 2013;56:798–805. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/cis1006.
Baltas I, et al. Long-term outcome and risk factors for late mortality in gram-negative bacteraemia: a retrospective cohort study. J Glob Antimicrob Resist. 2021;25:187–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jgar.2021.03.019.
Santoro A, et al. Epidemiology and risk factors associated with mortality in consecutive patients with bacterial bloodstream infection: impact of MDR and XDR bacteria. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofaa461.
Hernandez C, et al. Community-onset bacteraemia of unknown origin: clinical characteristics, epidemiology and outcome. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2014;33:1973–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10096-014-2146-3.
Ko H-K, et al. Intensive care unit-acquired bacteremia in mechanically ventilated patients: clinical features and outcomes. PLoS ONE. 2013;8:e83298. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0083298.
Kang C-I, et al. Bloodstream infections caused by antibiotic-resistant gram-negative bacilli: risk factors for mortality and impact of inappropriate initial antimicrobial therapy on outcome. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2005;49:760–6. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.49.2.760-766.2005.
Osmon S, Ward S, Fraser VJ, Kollef MH. Hospital mortality for patients with bacteremia due to Staphylococcus aureus or Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Chest. 2004;125:607–16. https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.125.2.607.
Wisplinghoff H, Bischoff T, Tallent SM, Seifert H, Wenzel RP, Edmond MB. Nosocomial bloodstream infections in US hospitals: analysis of 24,179 cases from a prospective nationwide surveillance study. Clin Infect Dis. 2004;39:309–17. https://doi.org/10.1086/421946.
Esel D, Doganay M, Alp E, Sumerkan B. Prospective evaluation of blood cultures in a Turkish university hospital: epidemiology, microbiology and patient outcome. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2003;9:1038–44. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1469-0691.2003.00714.x.
Thaden JT, Park LP, Maskarinec SA, Ruffin F, Fowler VG Jr, van Duin D. Results from a 13-Year prospective cohort study show increased mortality associated with bloodstream infections caused by pseudomonas aeruginosa compared to other bacteria. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2017;61(6):e02671–16. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.02671-16
Verdial C, Serrano I, Tavares L, Gil S, Oliveira M. Mechanisms of antibiotic and biocide resistance that contribute to Pseudomonas aeruginosa persistence in the hospital environment. Biomedicines. 2023;11:1221. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines11041221.
Poole K. Pseudomonas aeruginosa: resistance to the max. Front Microbiol. 2011. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2011.00065.
Breidenstein EBM, de la Fuente-Núñez C, Hancock REW. Pseudomonas aeruginosa: all roads lead to resistance. Trends Microbiol. 2011;19:419–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tim.2011.04.005.
Murray CJ, et al. Global burden of bacterial antimicrobial resistance in 2019: a systematic analysis. Lancet. 2022;399:629–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02724-0.
Rice LB. Federal funding for the study of antimicrobial resistance in nosocomial pathogens: no ESKAPE. J Infect Dis. 2008;197:1079–81. https://doi.org/10.1086/533452.
Tacconelli E, et al. Discovery, research, and development of new antibiotics: the WHO priority list of antibiotic-resistant bacteria and tuberculosis. Lancet Infect Dis. 2018;18:318–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(17)30753-3.
Wise MG, et al. Global trends in carbapenem- and difficult-to-treat-resistance among World Health Organization priority bacterial pathogens: ATLAS Surveillance Program 2018–2022. J Glob Antimicrob Resist. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jgar.2024.03.020.
European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control and World Health Organization. Antimicrobial resistance surveillance in Europe 2023—2021 data. 2023. https://doi.org/10.2900/63495.
Falagas ME, Karageorgopoulos DE. Pandrug resistance (PDR), extensive drug resistance (XDR), and multidrug resistance (MDR) among gram-negative bacilli: need for international harmonization in terminology. Clin Infect Dis. 2008;46:1121–2. https://doi.org/10.1086/528867.
Magiorakos A-P, et al. Multidrug-resistant, extensively drug-resistant and pandrug-resistant bacteria: an international expert proposal for interim standard definitions for acquired resistance. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2012;18:268–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-0691.2011.03570.x.
Kadri SS, et al. Difficult-to-treat resistance in gram-negative Bacteremia at 173 US hospitals: retrospective cohort analysis of prevalence, predictors, and outcome of resistance to all first-line agents. Clin Infect Dis. 2018;67:1803–14. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciy378.
Oliver A, et al. Pseudomonas aeruginosa antimicrobial susceptibility profiles, resistance mechanisms and international clonal lineages: update from ESGARS-ESCMID/ISARPAE Group. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2023.12.026.
Oliver A, Mulet X, López-Causapé C, Juan C. The increasing threat of Pseudomonas aeruginosa high-risk clones. Drug Resist Updates. 2015;21–22:41–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drup.2015.08.002.
Woodford N, Turton JF, Livermore DM. Multiresistant gram-negative bacteria: the role of high-risk clones in the dissemination of antibiotic resistance. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2011;35:736–55. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6976.2011.00268.x.
Liao C, Huang X, Wang Q, Yao D, Lu W. Virulence factors of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and antivirulence strategies to combat its drug resistance. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2022. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2022.926758.
Gellatly SL, Hancock REW. Pseudomonas aeruginosa : new insights into pathogenesis and host defenses. Pathog Dis. 2013;67:159–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/2049-632X.12033.
Jurado-Martín I, Sainz-Mejías M, McClean S. Pseudomonas aeruginosa: an audacious pathogen with an adaptable arsenal of virulence factors. Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22:1–37. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22063128.
Battle SE, Meyer F, Rello J, Kung VL, Hauser AR. Hybrid pathogenicity island PAGI-5 contributes to the highly virulent phenotype of a Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolate in mammals. J Bacteriol. 2008;190:7130–40. https://doi.org/10.1128/JB.00785-08.
Spencer DH, et al. Whole-genome sequence variation among multiple isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Bacteriol. 2003;185:1316–25. https://doi.org/10.1128/JB.185.4.1316-1325.2003.
Dangla-Pélissier G, et al. The horizontal transfer of Pseudomonas aeruginosa PA14 ICE PAPI-1 is controlled by a transcriptional triad between TprA, NdpA2 and MvaT. Nucleic Acids Res. 2021;49:10956–74. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkab827.
Harrison EM, et al. Pathogenicity islands PAPI-1 and PAPI-2 contribute individually and synergistically to the virulence of Pseudomonas aeruginosa strain PA14. Infect Immun. 2010;78:1437–46. https://doi.org/10.1128/IAI.00621-09.
Berthelot P, et al. Genotypic and phenotypic analysis of type III secretion system in a cohort of Pseudomonas aeruginosa Bacteremia isolates: evidence for a possible association between O serotypes and exo genes. J Infect Dis. 2003;188:512–8. https://doi.org/10.1086/377000.
Le Berre R, et al. Relative contribution of three main virulence factors in Pseudomonas aeruginosa pneumonia*. Crit Care Med. 2011;39:2113–20. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0b013e31821e899f.
Howell HA, Logan LK, Hauser AR. Type III secretion of ExoU is critical during early Pseudomonas aeruginosa pneumonia. MBio. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1128/mBio.00032-13.
Lu Q, et al. Pseudomonas aeruginosa serotypes in nosocomial pneumonia: prevalence and clinical outcomes. Crit Care. 2014;18:R17. https://doi.org/10.1186/cc13697.
R. Recio et al. Predictors of mortality in bloodstream infections caused by Pseudomonas aeruginosa and impact of antimicrobial resistance and bacterial virulence. 2020. Available: https://journals.asm.org/journal/aac.
Hauser AR. The type III secretion system of Pseudomonas aeruginosa: infection by injection. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2009;7:654–65. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro2199.
Engel J, Balachandran P. Role of Pseudomonas aeruginosa type III effectors in disease. Curr Opin Microbiol. 2009;12:61–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mib.2008.12.007.
JN Engel. Molecular pathogenesis of acute Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections. 2003. p. 201–229. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-0433-7_13.
El-Solh AA, Hattemer A, Hauser AR, Alhajhusain A, Vora H. Clinical outcomes of type III Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteremia*. Crit Care Med. 2012;40:1157–63. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0b013e3182377906.
Recio R, Villa J, Viedma E, Orellana MÁ, Lora-Tamayo J, Chaves F. Bacteraemia due to extensively drug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa sequence type 235 high-risk clone: facing the perfect storm. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2018;52:172–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2018.03.018.
Juan C, Peña C, Oliver A. Host and pathogen biomarkers for severe Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections. J Infect Dis. 2017;215:S44–51. https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jiw299.
JA Colmer-Hamood, N Dzvova, C Kruczek, AN Hamood. In vitro analysis of Pseudomonas aeruginosa virulence using conditions that mimic the environment at specific infection sites. 2016. p. 151–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.pmbts.2016.05.003.
Visca P, Imperi F, Lamont IL. Pyoverdine siderophores: from biogenesis to biosignificance. Trends Microbiol. 2007;15:22–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tim.2006.11.004.
Lau GW, Hassett DJ, Ran H, Kong F. The role of pyocyanin in Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection. Trends Mol Med. 2004;10:599–606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molmed.2004.10.002.
Feinbaum RL, et al. Genome-wide identification of Pseudomonas aeruginosa virulence-related genes using a Caenorhabditis elegans infection model. PLoS Pathog. 2012;8:e1002813. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1002813.
Gooderham WJ, Hancock REW. Regulation of virulence and antibiotic resistance by two-component regulatory systems in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2009;33:279–94. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6976.2008.00135.x.
Qin S, et al. Pseudomonas aeruginosa: pathogenesis, virulence factors, antibiotic resistance, interaction with host, technology advances and emerging therapeutics. Signal Transduct Target Ther. 2022;7:199. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41392-022-01056-1.
Jolley KA, Bray JE, Maiden MCJ. Open-access bacterial population genomics: BIGSdb software, the PubMLST.org website and their applications. Wellcome Open Res. 2018;3:124. https://doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.14826.1.
Pelegrin AC, et al. Pseudomonas aeruginosa : a clinical and genomics update. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1093/femsre/fuab026.
Pirzadian J, et al. National surveillance pilot study unveils a multicenter, clonal outbreak of VIM-2-producing Pseudomonas aeruginosa ST111 in the Netherlands between 2015 and 2017. Sci Rep. 2021;11:21015. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-00205-w.
Treepong P, et al. Global emergence of the widespread Pseudomonas aeruginosa ST235 clone. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2018;24:258–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2017.06.018.
Pincus NB, et al. Long-term persistence of an extensively drug-resistant subclade of globally distributed Pseudomonas aeruginosa clonal complex 446 in an Academic Medical Center. Clin Infect Dis. 2020;71:1524–31. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciz973.
del Barrio-Tofiño E, López-Causapé C, Oliver A. Pseudomonas aeruginosa epidemic high-risk clones and their association with horizontally-acquired β-lactamases: 2020 update. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2020;56:106196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2020.106196.
Cabot G, et al. Deciphering the resistome of the widespread Pseudomonas aeruginosa sequence type 175 international high-risk clone through whole-genome sequencing. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2016;60:7415–23. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01720-16.
Cabot G, et al. Genetic markers of widespread extensively drug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa high-risk clones. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2012;56:6349–57. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01388-12.
del Barrio-Tofiño E, et al. Spanish nationwide survey on Pseudomonas aeruginosa antimicrobial resistance mechanisms and epidemiology. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2019;74:1825–35. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkz147.
Gómez-Zorrilla S, et al. Impact of multidrug resistance on the pathogenicity of Pseudomonas aeruginosa: in vitro and in vivo studies. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2016;47:368–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2016.02.010.
Takata I, Yamagishi Y, Mikamo H. Association of the exoU genotype with a multidrug non-susceptible phenotype and mRNA expressions of resistance genes in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Infect Chemother. 2018;24:45–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiac.2017.08.018.
Fischer S, Dethlefsen S, Klockgether J, Tümmler B. Phenotypic and genomic comparison of the two most common ExoU-Positive Pseudomonas aeruginosa clones, PA14 and ST235. mSystems. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1128/mSystems.01007-20.
Maatallah M, et al. Population structure of Pseudomonas aeruginosa from five Mediterranean countries: evidence for frequent recombination and epidemic occurrence of CC235. PLoS ONE. 2011;6:e25617. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0025617.
Viedma E, et al. Nosocomial spread of colistin-only-sensitive sequence type 235 Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates producing the extended-spectrum β-lactamases GES-1 and GES-5 in Spain. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2009;53:4930–3. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.00900-09.
Recio R, et al. Pathogenic characteristics of Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteraemia isolates in a high-endemicity setting for ST175 and ST235 high-risk clones. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2020;39:671–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10096-019-03780-z.
Mulet X, et al. Biological markers of Pseudomonas aeruginosa epidemic high-risk clones. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2013;57:5527–35. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01481-13.
Lee J-Y, Peck KR, Ko KS. Selective advantages of two major clones of carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates (CC235 and CC641) from Korea: antimicrobial resistance, virulence and biofilm-forming activity. J Med Microbiol. 2013;62:1015–24. https://doi.org/10.1099/jmm.0.055426-0.
Hu Y, et al. A potential high-risk clone of Pseudomonas aeruginosa ST463. Front Microbiol. 2021. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2021.670202.
Cheng K, et al. Spread of β-lactam-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa in a cystic fibrosis clinic. Lancet. 1996;348:639–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(96)05169-0.
Römling U, Kader A, Sriramulu DD, Simm R, Kronvall G. Worldwide distribution of Pseudomonas aeruginosa clone C strains in the aquatic environment and cystic fibrosis patients. Environ Microbiol. 2005;7:1029–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1462-2920.2005.00780.x.
Mustafa M-H, et al. Antimicrobial susceptibility of Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolated from cystic fibrosis patients in Northern Europe. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2016;60:6735–41. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01046-16.
López-Causapé C, Oliver A. Insights into the evolution of the mutational resistome of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in cystic fibrosis. Future Microbiol. 2017;12:1445–8. https://doi.org/10.2217/fmb-2017-0197.
Chichón G, López M, de Toro M, Ruiz-Roldán L, Rojo-Bezares B, Sáenz Y. Spread of Pseudomonas aeruginosa ST274 clone in different niches: resistome, virulome, and phylogenetic relationship. Antibiotics. 2023;12:1561. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics12111561.
Botelho J, Grosso F, Peixe L. Antibiotic resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa—mechanisms, epidemiology and evolution. Drug Resist Updates. 2019;44:100640. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drup.2019.07.002.
Beceiro A, Tomás M, Bou G. Antimicrobial resistance and virulence: a successful or deleterious association in the bacterial world? Clin Microbiol Rev. 2013;26:185–230. https://doi.org/10.1128/CMR.00059-12.
Malhotra S, Hayes D, Wozniak DJ. Cystic fibrosis and Pseudomonas aeruginosa: the host-microbe interface. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1128/CMR.00138-18.
Melnyk AH, Wong A, Kassen R. The fitness costs of antibiotic resistance mutations. Evol Appl. 2015;8:273–83. https://doi.org/10.1111/eva.12196.
Vogwill T, MacLean RC. The genetic basis of the fitness costs of antimicrobial resistance: a meta-analysis approach. Evol Appl. 2015;8:284–95. https://doi.org/10.1111/eva.12202.
Melnyk AH, McCloskey N, Hinz AJ, Dettman J, Kassen R. Evolution of cost-free resistance under fluctuating drug selection in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. mSphere. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1128/mSphere.00158-17.
Langendonk RF, Neill DR, Fothergill JL. The Building blocks of antimicrobial resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa: implications for current resistance-breaking therapies. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2021. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2021.665759.
Andersson DI. The biological cost of mutational antibiotic resistance: any practical conclusions? Curr Opin Microbiol. 2006;9:461–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mib.2006.07.002.
Andersson DI, Hughes D. Antibiotic resistance and its cost: is it possible to reverse resistance? Nat Rev Microbiol. 2010;8:260–71. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro2319.
San Millan A, Heilbron K, MacLean RC. Positive epistasis between co-infecting plasmids promotes plasmid survival in bacterial populations. ISME J. 2014;8:601–12. https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2013.182.
Souque C, Escudero JA, MacLean RC. Off-Target Integron Activity Leads to Rapid Plasmid Compensatory Evolution in Response to Antibiotic Selection Pressure. MBio. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1128/mbio.02537-22.
San Millan A, Toll-Riera M, Qi Q, MacLean RC. Interactions between horizontally acquired genes create a fitness cost in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Nat Commun. 2015;6:6845. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms7845.
Aoki S, et al. Virulence of metallo-β-lactamase-producing Pseudomonas aeruginosa in vitro and in vivo. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2004;48:1876–8. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.48.5.1876-1878.2004.
Ramisse F, Delden C, Gidenne S, Cavallo J-D, Hernandez E. Decreased virulence of a strain of Pseudomonas aeruginosa O12 overexpressing a chromosomal type 1 Î2-lactamase could be due to reduced expression of cell-to-cell signaling dependent virulence factors. FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol. 2000;28:241–5. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-695X.2000.tb01483.x.
Barceló IM, et al. Impact of peptidoglycan recycling blockade and expression of horizontally acquired β-lactamases on Pseudomonas aeruginosa virulence. Microbiol Spectr. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.02019-21.
Gallant CV, et al. Common β-lactamases inhibit bacterial biofilm formation. Mol Microbiol. 2005;58:1012–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2958.2005.04892.x.
Fernández A, et al. Expression of OXA-type and SFO-1 β-lactamases induces changes in peptidoglycan composition and affects bacterial fitness. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2012;56:1877–84. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.05402-11.
Escobar-Salom M, Barceló IM, Jordana-Lluch E, Torrens G, Oliver A, Juan C. Bacterial virulence regulation through soluble peptidoglycan fragments sensing and response: knowledge gaps and therapeutic potential. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1093/femsre/fuad010.
Lai H-Y, Cooper TF. Interaction with a phage gene underlie costs of a β-lactamase. MBio. 2024;15:2. https://doi.org/10.1128/mbio.02776-23.
López C, Ayala JA, Bonomo RA, González LJ, Vila AJ. Protein determinants of dissemination and host specificity of metallo-β-lactamases. Nat Commun. 2019;10:3617. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-11615-w.
Seupt A, Schniederjans M, Tomasch J, Häussler S. Expression of the MexXY aminoglycoside efflux pump and presence of an aminoglycoside-modifying enzyme in clinical Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates are highly correlated. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01166-20.
Cervoni M, Lo Sciuto A, Bianchini C, Mancone C, Imperi F. Exogenous and endogenous phosphoethanolamine transferases differently affect colistin resistance and fitness in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Front Microbiol. 2021. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2021.778968.
Barceló IM, et al. Role of enzymatic activity in the biological cost associated with the production of AmpC β-lactamases in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Microbiol Spectr. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.02700-22.
Pérez-Gallego M, et al. Impact of AmpC derepression on fitness and virulence: the mechanism or the pathway? MBio. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1128/mBio.01783-16.
Jordana-Lluch E, et al. The balance between antibiotic resistance and fitness/virulence in Pseudomonas aeruginosa: an update on basic knowledge and fundamental research. Front Microbiol. 2023. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2023.1270999.
Papp-Wallace KM, Mack AR, Taracila MA, Bonomo RA. Resistance to novel β-lactam–β-lactamase inhibitor combinations. Infect Dis Clin N Am. 2020;34:773–819. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.idc.2020.05.001.
Sánchez-Diener I, et al. Interplay among resistance profiles, high-risk clones, and virulence in the Caenorhabditis elegans Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01586-17.
Kong K-F, et al. Pseudomonas aeruginosa AmpR is a global transcriptional factor that regulates expression of AmpC and PoxB β-lactamases, proteases, quorum sensing, and other virulence factors. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2005;49:4567–75. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.49.11.4567-4575.2005.
Roux D, et al. Fitness cost of antibiotic susceptibility during bacterial infection. Sci Transl Med. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.aab1621.
Skurnik D, et al. Enhanced in vivo fitness of carbapenem-resistant oprD mutants of Pseudomonas aeruginosa revealed through high-throughput sequencing. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2013;110:20747–52. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1221552110.
Abdelraouf K, Kabbara S, Ledesma KR, Poole K, Tam VH. Effect of multidrug resistance-conferring mutations on the fitness and virulence of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2011;66:1311–7. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkr105.
Lorusso AB, Carrara JA, Barroso CDN, Tuon FF, Faoro H. Role of efflux pumps on antimicrobial resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Int J Mol Sci. 2022;23:15779. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms232415779.
Stickland HG, Davenport PW, Lilley KS, Griffin JL, Welch M. Mutation of nfxB causes global changes in the physiology and metabolism of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Proteome Res. 2010;9:2957–67. https://doi.org/10.1021/pr9011415.
Linares JF, López JA, Camafeita E, Albar JP, Rojo F, Martínez JL. Overexpression of the multidrug efflux pumps MexCD-OprJ and MexEF-OprN is associated with a reduction of type III secretion in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Bacteriol. 2005;187:1384–91. https://doi.org/10.1128/JB.187.4.1384-1391.2005.
Jeannot K, Elsen S, Köhler T, Attree I, van Delden C, Plésiat P. Resistance and virulence of Pseudomonas aeruginosa clinical strains overproducing the MexCD-OprJ efflux pump. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2008;52:2455–62. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01107-07.
Martínez-Ramos I, Mulet X, Moyá B, Barbier M, Oliver A, Albertí S. Overexpression of MexCD-OprJ reduces Pseudomonas aeruginosa virulence by increasing its susceptibility to complement-mediated killing. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014;58:2426–9. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.02012-13.
Köhler T, van Delden C, Curty LK, Hamzehpour MM, Pechere J-C. Overexpression of the MexEF-OprN multidrug efflux system affects cell-to-cell signaling in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Bacteriol. 2001;183:5213–22. https://doi.org/10.1128/JB.183.18.5213-5222.2001.
Cosson P, et al. Pseudomonas aeruginosa virulence analyzed in a Dictyostelium discoideum host system. J Bacteriol. 2002;184:3027–33. https://doi.org/10.1128/JB.184.11.3027-3033.2002.
Lamarche MG, Déziel E. MexEF-OprN efflux pump exports the Pseudomonas Quinolone Signal (PQS) precursor HHQ (4-hydroxy-2-heptylquinoline). PLoS ONE. 2011;6: e24310. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0024310.
Olivares J, Alvarez-Ortega C, Linares JF, Rojo F, Köhler T, Martínez JL. Overproduction of the multidrug efflux pump MexEF-OprN does not impair Pseudomonas aeruginosa fitness in competition tests, but produces specific changes in bacterial regulatory networks. Environ Microbiol. 2012;14:1968–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1462-2920.2012.02727.x.
Wang D, Seeve C, Pierson LS, Pierson EA. Transcriptome profiling reveals links between ParS/ParR, MexEF-OprN, and quorum sensing in the regulation of adaptation and virulence in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. BMC Genomics. 2013;14:618. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-14-618.
Vaillancourt M, Limsuwannarot SP, Bresee C, Poopalarajah R, Jorth P. Pseudomonas aeruginosa mexR and mexEF antibiotic efflux pump variants exhibit increased virulence. Antibiotics. 2021;10:1164. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics10101164.
Olivas AD, et al. Intestinal tissues induce an SNP mutation in Pseudomonas aeruginosa that enhances its virulence: possible role in anastomotic leak. PLoS ONE. 2012;7:e44326. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0044326.
Luong PM, et al. Emergence of the P2 phenotype in Pseudomonas aeruginosa PAO1 strains involves various mutations in mexT or mexF. J Bacteriol. 2014;196:504–13. https://doi.org/10.1128/JB.01050-13.
Evans K, Passador L, Srikumar R, Tsang E, Nezezon J, Poole K. Influence of the MexAB-OprM multidrug efflux system on quorum sensing in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Bacteriol. 1998;180:5443–7. https://doi.org/10.1128/JB.180.20.5443-5447.1998.
Sanchez P. Fitness of in vitro selected Pseudomonas aeruginosanalB and nfxB multidrug resistant mutants. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2002;50:657–64. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkf185.
Jorth P, et al. Evolved aztreonam resistance is multifactorial and can produce hypervirulence in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. MBio. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1128/mBio.00517-17.
Ikarashi K, Kutsuna R, Tomida J, Kawamura Y, Morita Y. Overexpression of the MexXY multidrug efflux system correlates with deficient pyoverdine production in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Antibiotics. 2021;10:658. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics10060658.
Hirakata Y, et al. Multidrug efflux systems play an important role in the invasiveness of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Exp Med. 2002;196:109–18. https://doi.org/10.1084/jem.20020005.
Bruchmann S, Dötsch A, Nouri B, Chaberny IF, Häussler S. Quantitative contributions of target alteration and decreased drug accumulation to Pseudomonas aeruginosa fluoroquinolone resistance. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2013;57:1361–8. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01581-12.
Kugelberg E, Löfmark S, Wretlind B, Andersson DI. Reduction of the fitness burden of quinolone resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2005;55:22–30. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkh505.
Agnello M, Finkel SE, Wong-Beringer A. Fitness cost of fluoroquinolone resistance in clinical isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa differs by type III secretion genotype. Front Microbiol. 2016. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2016.01591.
Agnello M, Wong-Beringer A. Differentiation in quinolone resistance by virulence genotype in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. PLoS ONE. 2012;7:e42973. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0042973.
Jeannot K, Bolard A, Plésiat P. Resistance to polymyxins in Gram-negative organisms. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2017;49:526–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2016.11.029.
Lo Sciuto A, Cervoni M, Stefanelli R, Mancone C, Imperi F. Effect of lipid A aminoarabinosylation on Pseudomonas aeruginosa colistin resistance and fitness. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2020;55:105957. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2020.105957.
Javed M, et al. Transcriptomic basis of serum resistance and virulence related traits in XDR P. aeruginosa evolved under antibiotic pressure in a morbidostat device. Front Microbiol. 2021. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2020.619542.
Bulman ZP, et al. Emergence of polymyxin B resistance influences pathogenicity in Pseudomonas aeruginosa mutators. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015;59:4343–6. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.04629-14.
Castañeda-García A, Rodríguez-Rojas A, Guelfo JR, Blázquez J. The glycerol-3-phosphate permease GlpT is the only fosfomycin transporter in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Bacteriol. 2009;191:6968–74. https://doi.org/10.1128/JB.00748-09.
Rodríguez-Rojas A, et al. Assessing the emergence of resistance: the absence of biological cost in vivo may compromise fosfomycin treatments for P. aeruginosa infections. PLoS ONE. 2010;5:e10193. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0010193.
Horna G, Amaro C, Palacios A, Guerra H, Ruiz J. High frequency of the exoU+/exoS+ genotype associated with multidrug-resistant ‘high-risk clones’ of Pseudomonas aeruginosa clinical isolates from Peruvian hospitals. Sci Rep. 2019;9:10874. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-47303-4.
del Barrio-Tofiño E, et al. Association between Pseudomonas aeruginosa O-antigen serotypes, resistance profiles and high-risk clones: results from a Spanish nationwide survey. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2019;74:3217–20. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkz346.
Jamasbi RJ, Proudfoot EM. Phenotypic and genotypic characteristics of clinical isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa: rate of occurrence and distribution of different serotypes, antimicrobial susceptibility profiles, and molecular typing. Lab Med. 2008;39:155–61. https://doi.org/10.1309/1BAWW0951N7V71CE.
Wu T, et al. The type III secretion system facilitates systemic infections of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in the clinic. Microbiol Spectr. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.02224-23.
Deptuła A, Gospodarek E. Reduced expression of virulence factors in multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa strains. Arch Microbiol. 2010;192:79–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00203-009-0528-1.
Fuse K, et al. Reduction of virulence factor pyocyanin production in multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Infect Chemother. 2013;19:82–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10156-012-0457-9.
Rodulfo H, et al. Virulence factors and integrons are associated with MDR and XDR phenotypes in nosocomial strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in a Venezuelan university hospital. Rev Inst Med Trop Sao Paulo. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1678-9946201961020.
EL-Mahdy R, El-Kannishy G. Virulence factors of carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa in hospital-acquired infections in Mansoura, Egypt. Infect Drug Resist. 2019;12:3455–61. https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S222329.
Finlayson PBEA. Comparison of antibiotic resistance and virulence factors in pigmented and non-pigmented Pseudomonas aeruginosa. West Indian Med J. 2011;60:24–32.
Gajdács M, et al. No correlation between biofilm formation, virulence factors, and antibiotic resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa: results from a laboratory-based in vitro study. Antibiotics. 2021;10:1134. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics10091134.
Kaiser SJ, Mutters NT, DeRosa A, Ewers C, Frank U, Günther F. Determinants for persistence of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in hospitals: interplay between resistance, virulence and biofilm formation. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2017;36:243–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10096-016-2792-8.
Karatuna O, Yagci A. Analysis of quorum sensing-dependent virulence factor production and its relationship with antimicrobial susceptibility in Pseudomonas aeruginosa respiratory isolates. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2010;16:1770–5. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-0691.2010.03177.x.
Ratajczak M, Kamińska D, Nowak-Malczewska D, Schneider A, Dlugaszewska J. Relationship between antibiotic resistance, biofilm formation, genes coding virulence factors and source of origin of Pseudomonas aeruginosa clinical strains. Ann Agric Environ Med. 2021;28:306–13. https://doi.org/10.26444/aaem/122682.
Eladawy M, El-Mowafy M, El-Sokkary MMA, Barwa R. Antimicrobial resistance and virulence characteristics in ERIC-PCR typed biofilm forming isolates of P. aeruginosa. Microb Pathog. 2021;158:105042. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micpath.2021.105042.
Yamani L, Alamri A, Alsultan A, Alfifi S, Ansari MA, Alnimr A. Inverse correlation between biofilm production efficiency and antimicrobial resistance in clinical isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Microb Pathog. 2021;157:104989. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micpath.2021.104989.
Wood SJ, Kuzel TM, Shafikhani SH. Pseudomonas aeruginosa: infections, animal modeling, and therapeutics. Cells. 2023;12:199. https://doi.org/10.3390/cells12010199.
Admella J, Torrents E. Investigating bacterial infections in Galleria mellonella larvae: insights into pathogen dissemination and behavior. J Invertebr Pathol. 2023;200:107975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jip.2023.107975.
Giamarellosbourboulis E. Experimental sepsis using Pseudomonas aeruginosa: the significance of multi-drug resistance. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2004;24:357–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2004.03.025.
Giamarellos-Bourboulis EJ, et al. Stimulation of innate immunity by susceptible and multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa : an in vitro and in vivo study. Clin Exp Immunol. 2004;135:240–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2249.2003.02365.x.
Giamarellos-Bourboulis EJ, et al. Impact of multidrug resistance on experimental empyema by Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Respiration. 2011;82:46–53. https://doi.org/10.1159/000326893.
Gómez-Zorrilla S, et al. Understanding the acute inflammatory response to Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection: differences between susceptible and multidrug-resistant strains in a mouse peritonitis model. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2017;49:198–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2016.10.016.
Torrens G, et al. In vivo validation of peptidoglycan recycling as a target to disable AmpC-mediated resistance and reduce virulence enhancing the cell-wall–targeting immunity. J Infect Dis. 2019;220:1729–37. https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jiz377.
Pincus NB, et al. A genome-based model to predict the virulence of Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates. MBio. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1128/mBio.01527-20.
Ménard G, Rouillon A, Cattoir V, Donnio P-Y. Galleria mellonella as a suitable model of bacterial infection: past, present and future. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2021. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2021.782733.
Miyata S, Casey M, Frank DW, Ausubel FM, Drenkard E. Use of the Galleria mellonella caterpillar as a model host to study the role of the type III secretion system in Pseudomonas aeruginosa pathogenesis. Infect Immun. 2003;71:2404–13. https://doi.org/10.1128/IAI.71.5.2404-2413.2003.
Tan M-W, Shapira M. Genetic and molecular analysis of nematode-microbe interactions. Cell Microbiol. 2011;13:497–507. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1462-5822.2011.01570.x.
Tan M-W, Rahme LG, Sternberg JA, Tompkins RG, Ausubel FM. Pseudomonas aeruginosa killing of Caenorhabditis elegans used to identify P. aeruginosa virulence factors. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 1999;96:2408–13. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.96.5.2408.
Tan M. Caenorhabditis elegans: a model genetic host to study Pseudomonas aeruginosa pathogenesis. Curr Opin Microbiol. 2000;3:29–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1369-5274(99)00047-8.
Silverman GA, et al. Modeling molecular and cellular aspects of human disease using the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans. Pediatr Res. 2009;65:10–8. https://doi.org/10.1203/PDR.0b013e31819009b0.
Balasubramanian D, et al. The regulatory repertoire of Pseudomonas aeruginosa AmpC ß-lactamase regulator AmpR includes virulence genes. PLoS ONE. 2012;7:e34067. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0034067.
Sánchez-Diener I, et al. Weighting the impact of virulence on the outcome of Pseudomonas aeruginosa bloodstream infections. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2020;26:351–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2019.06.034.
Jander G, Rahme LG, Ausubel FM. Positive correlation between virulence of Pseudomonas aeruginosa mutants in mice and insects. J Bacteriol. 2000;182:3843–5. https://doi.org/10.1128/JB.182.13.3843-3845.2000.
de O. Maia M, et al. Multidrug-resistant bacteria on critically ill patients with sepsis at hospital admission: risk factors and effects on hospital mortality. Infect Drug Resist. 2023;16:1693–704. https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S401754.
Hernández-Jiménez P, et al. Risk factors and outcomes for multidrug resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection in immunocompromised patients. Antibiotics. 2022;11:1459. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11111459.
Hirsch EB, Tam VH. Impact of multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection on patient outcomes. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2010;10:441–51. https://doi.org/10.1586/erp.10.49.
Vardakas KZ, Rafailidis PI, Konstantelias AA, Falagas ME. Predictors of mortality in patients with infections due to multi-drug resistant Gram negative bacteria: the study, the patient, the bug or the drug? J Infect. 2013;66:401–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2012.10.028.
Zavascki AP, Barth AL, Goldani LZ. Nosocomial bloodstream infections due to metallo- -lactamase-producing Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2008;61:1183–5. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkn082.
Dantas RC, Ferreira ML, Gontijo-Filho PP, Ribas RM. Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteraemia: independent risk factors for mortality and impact of resistance on outcome. J Med Microbiol. 2014;63:1679–87. https://doi.org/10.1099/jmm.0.073262-0.
Cosgrove SE. The relationship between antimicrobial resistance and patient outcomes: mortality, length of hospital stay, and health care costs. Clin Infect Dis. 2006;42:S82–9. https://doi.org/10.1086/499406.
Kadri SS, et al. Inappropriate empirical antibiotic therapy for bloodstream infections based on discordant in-vitro susceptibilities: a retrospective cohort analysis of prevalence, predictors, and mortality risk in US hospitals. Lancet Infect Dis. 2021;21:241–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30477-1.
Chumbita M, et al. High rate of inappropriate antibiotics in patients with hematologic malignancies and Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteremia following International Guideline Recommendations. Microbiol Spectr. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.00674-23.
Horcajada JP, et al. Epidemiology and treatment of multidrug-resistant and extensively drug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1128/CMR.00031-19.
McCarthy KL, Paterson DL. Long-term mortality following Pseudomonas aeruginosa bloodstream infection. J Hosp Infect. 2017;95:292–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2016.11.014.
Callejas-Díaz A, Fernández-Pérez C, Ramos-Martínez A, Múñez-Rubio E, Sánchez-Romero I, Vargas Núñez JA. Impacto de la bacteriemia por Pseudomonas aeruginosa en un hospital de tercer nivel: mortalidad y factores pronósticos. Med Clin (Barc). 2019;152:83–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medcli.2018.04.020.
Bodro M, et al. Extensively drug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa Bacteremia in solid organ transplant recipients. Transplantation. 2015;99:616–22. https://doi.org/10.1097/TP.0000000000000366.
Suárez C, et al. Influence of carbapenem resistance on mortality and the dynamics of mortality in Pseudomonas aeruginosa bloodstream infection. Int J Infect Dis. 2010;14:e73–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2009.11.019.
Peña C, et al. Prospective multicenter study of the impact of carbapenem resistance on mortality in Pseudomonas aeruginosa bloodstream infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2012;56:1265–72. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.05991-11.
Herrera S, et al. Pseudomonas aeruginosa bloodstream infection, resistance, and mortality: do solid organ transplant recipients do better or worse? Antibiotics. 2023;12:380. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics12020380.
Yuan Q, et al. Risk factors and outcomes of inpatients with carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa bloodstream infections in China: a 9-year trend and multicenter cohort study. Front Microbiol. 2023. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2023.1137811.
Zhen S, et al. Assessment of mortality-related risk factors and effective antimicrobial regimens for treatment of bloodstream infections caused by carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa in patients with hematological diseases. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2023. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2023.1156651.
Zhao Y, et al. Risk Factors and outcomes of antibiotic-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa bloodstream infection in adult patients with acute leukemia. Clin Infect Dis. 2020;71:S386–93. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciaa1522.
Rolo M, et al. Clinical impact of time-to-positivity of blood cultures on mortality in patients with Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteremia. J Glob Antimicrob Resist. 2022;30:269–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jgar.2022.06.026.
Recio R, et al. Clinical and bacterial characteristics of Pseudomonas aeruginosa affecting the outcome of patients with bacteraemic pneumonia. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2021;58:106450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2021.106450.
Zhang Y, et al. Risk factors for mortality of inpatients with pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteremia in China: impact of resistance profile in the mortality. Infect Drug Resist. 2020;13:4115–23. https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S268744.
Babich T, et al. Risk factors for mortality among patients with Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteraemia: a retrospective multicentre study. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2020;55:105847. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2019.11.004.
Tam VH, Rogers CA, Chang K-T, Weston JS, Caeiro J-P, Garey KW. Impact of multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteremia on patient outcomes. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2010;54:3717–22. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.00207-10.
Joo E-J, et al. Risk factors for mortality in patients with Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteremia: clinical impact of antimicrobial resistance on outcome. Microb Drug Resist. 2011;17:305–12. https://doi.org/10.1089/mdr.2010.0170.
Morata L, et al. Influence of multidrug resistance and appropriate empirical therapy on the 30-day mortality rate of Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteremia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2012;56:4833–7. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.00750-12.
Paterson DL, Doi Y. A step closer to extreme drug resistance (XDR) in Gram-negative bacilli. Clin Infect Dis. 2007;45:1179–81. https://doi.org/10.1086/522287.
Wei X, Li L, Li M, Liang H, He Y, Li S. Risk factors and outcomes of patients with carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa bloodstream infection. Infect Drug Resist. 2023;16:337–45. https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S396428.
Montero MM, et al. Risk factors for mortality among patients with Pseudomonas aeruginosa bloodstream infections: what is the influence of XDR phenotype on outcomes? J Clin Med. 2020;9:514. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9020514.
Buehrle DJ, Shields RK, Clarke LG, Potoski BA, Clancy CJ, Nguyen MH. Carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteremia: risk factors for mortality and microbiologic treatment failure. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01243-16.
Carmeli Y, Troillet N, Karchmer AW, Samore MH. Health and economic outcomes of antibiotic resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Arch Intern Med. 1999;159:1127. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.159.10.1127.
Combes A, Luyt C-E, Fagon J-Y, Wolff M, Trouillet J-L, Chastre J. Early predictors for infection recurrence and death in patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia. Crit Care Med. 2007;35:146–54. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.CCM.0000249826.81273.E4.
Kollef MH, Silver P, Murphy DM, Trovillion E. The effect of late-onset ventilator-associated pneumonia in determining patient mortality. Chest. 1995;108:1655–62. https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.108.6.1655.
Lambert M-L, et al. Clinical outcomes of health-care-associated infections and antimicrobial resistance in patients admitted to European intensive-care units: a cohort study. Lancet Infect Dis. 2011;11:30–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473.
Martin-Loeches I, et al. Resistance patterns and outcomes in intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired pneumonia. Validation of European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) classification of multidrug resistant organisms. J Infect. 2015;70:213–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2014.10.004.
Chittawatanarat K, Jaipakdee W, Chotirosniramit N, Chandacham K, Jirapongcharoenlap T. Microbiology, resistance patterns, and risk factors of mortality in ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia in a Northern Thai tertiary-care university based general surgical intensive care unit. Infect Drug Resist. 2014. https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S67267.
Di Pasquale M, et al. Assessment of severity of ICU-acquired pneumonia and association with etiology. Crit Care Med. 2014;42:303–12. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0b013e3182a272a2.
Depuydt PO, et al. Determinants and impact of multidrug antibiotic resistance in pathogens causing ventilator-associatedpneumonia. Crit Care. 2008. https://doi.org/10.1186/cc7119
Arvanitis M, Anagnostou T, Kourkoumpetis TK, Ziakas PD, Desalermos A, Mylonakis E. The impact of antimicrobial resistance and aging in VAP outcomes: experience from a large tertiary care center. PLoS ONE. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0089984.
Peña C, et al. Impact of multidrug resistance on Pseudomonas aeruginosa ventilator-associated pneumonia outcome: predictors of early and crude mortality. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2013;32:413–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10096-012-1758-8.
Tumbarello M, et al. Clinical outcomes of Pseudomonas aeruginosa pneumonia in intensive care unit patients. Intensive Care Med. 2013;39:682–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-013-2828-9.
Planquette B, et al. Pseudomonas aeruginosa ventilator-associated pneumonia: predictive factors of treatment failure. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2013;188:69–76. https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201210-1897OC.
Denis JB, et al. Multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa and mortality in mechanically ventilated ICU patients. Am J Infect Control. 2019;47:1059–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2019.02.030.
Kaminski C, et al. Impact of ureido/carboxypenicillin resistance on the prognosis of ventilator-associated pneumonia due to Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Crit Care. 2011;15:2. https://doi.org/10.1186/cc10136.
Combes A, Luyt CE, Fagon JY, Wolff M, Trouillet JL, Chastre J. Impact of piperacillin resistance on the outcome of Pseudomonas ventilator-associated pneumonia. Intensive Care Med. 2006;32:1970–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-006-0355-7.
Micek ST, et al. An international multicenter retrospective study of Pseudomonas aeruginosa nosocomial pneumonia: impact of multidrug resistance. Crit Care. 2015;19:219. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-015-0926-5.
Tumbarello M, et al. Characterisation and risk factor profiling of Pseudomonas aeruginosa urinary tract infections: pinpointing those likely to be caused by multidrug-resistant strains. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2020.105900.
Ferreiro JLL, et al. Pseudomonas aeruginosa urinary tract infections in hospitalized patients: mortality and prognostic factors. PLoS ONE. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0178178.
Jeong SJ, Yoon SS, Bae IK, Jeong SH, Kim JM, Lee K. Risk factors for mortality in patients with bloodstream infections caused by carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa: clinical impact of bacterial virulence and strains on outcome. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2014;80:130–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2014.07.003.
Kaier K, Heister T, Götting T, Wolkewitz M, Mutters NT. Measuring the in-hospital costs of Pseudomonas aeruginosa pneumonia: methodology and results from a German teaching hospital. BMC Infect Dis. 2019;19:1028. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-019-4660-5.
Bou R, et al. Hospital economic impact of an outbreak of Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections. J Hosp Infect. 2009;71:138–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2008.07.018.
Poudel AN, et al. The economic burden of antibiotic resistance: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE. 2023;18:e0285170. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0285170.
Morales E, et al. Hospital costs of nosocomial multi-drug resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa acquisition. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012;12:122. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-12-122.
Tabak YP, et al. Incremental clinical and economic burden of suspected respiratory infections due to multi-drug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa in the United States. J Hosp Infect. 2019;103:134–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2019.06.005.
Chen Z, Xu Z, Wu H, Chen L, Gao S, Chen Y. The impact of carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa on clinical and economic outcomes in a Chinese tertiary care hospital: a propensity score–matched analysis. Am J Infect Control. 2019;47:677–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2018.10.025.
Lautenbach E, et al. Imipenem resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa emergence, epidemiology, and impact on clinical and economic outcomes. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2010;31:47–53. https://doi.org/10.1086/649021.
Zhen X, Stålsby Lundborg C, Sun X, Gu S, Dong H. Clinical and economic burden of carbapenem-resistant infection or colonization caused by Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Acinetobacter baumannii: a multicenter study in China. Antibiotics. 2020;9:514. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics9080514.
Yahav D, Shepshelovich D, Tau N. Cost analysis of new antibiotics to treat multidrug-resistant bacterial infections: mind the gap. Infect Dis Ther. 2021;10:621–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40121-021-00412-y.
Founou RC, Founou LL, Essack SY. Clinical and economic impact of antibiotic resistance in developing countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE. 2017;12:e0189621. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189621.
Allegranzi B, et al. Burden of endemic health-care-associated infection in developing countries: systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2011;377:228–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61458-4.
Laxminarayan R, et al. Access to effective antimicrobials: a worldwide challenge. Lancet. 2016;387:168–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00474-2.
Yahav D, Giske CG, Grāmatniece A, Abodakpi H, Tam VH, Leibovici L. New β-lactam–β-lactamase inhibitor combinations. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1128/CMR.00115-20.
Geisinger E, Isberg RR. Interplay between antibiotic resistance and virulence during disease promoted by multidrug-resistant bacteria. J Infect Dis. 2017;215:S9–17. https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jiw402.
Bouteiller M, et al. Pseudomonas flagella: generalities and specificities. Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22:3337. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22073337.
Zhang S, McCormack FX, Levesque RC, O’Toole GA, Lau GW. The flagellum of Pseudomonas aeruginosa is required for resistance to clearance by surfactant protein A. PLoS ONE. 2007;2:e564. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0000564.
Bucior I, Pielage JF, Engel JN. Pseudomonas aeruginosa pili and flagella mediate distinct binding and signaling events at the apical and basolateral surface of airway epithelium. PLoS Pathog. 2012;8:e1002616. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1002616.
Leighton TL, Buensuceso RNC, Howell PL, Burrows LL. Biogenesis of P seudomonas aeruginosa type IV pili and regulation of their function. Environ Microbiol. 2015;17:4148–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/1462-2920.12849.
Burrows LL. Pseudomonas aeruginosa twitching motility: type IV pili in action. Annu Rev Microbiol. 2012;66:493–520. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-micro-092611-150055.
Overhage J, Bains M, Brazas MD, Hancock REW. Swarming of Pseudomonas aeruginosa is a complex adaptation leading to increased production of virulence factors and antibiotic resistance. J Bacteriol. 2008;190:2671–9. https://doi.org/10.1128/JB.01659-07.
Pier G. Pseudomonas aeruginosa lipopolysaccharide: a major virulence factor, initiator of inflammation and target for effective immunity. Int J Med Microbiol. 2007;297:277–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmm.2007.03.012.
Veetilvalappil VV, Manuel A, Aranjani JM, Tawale R, Koteshwara A. Pathogenic arsenal of Pseudomonas aeruginosa: an update on virulence factors. Future Microbiol. 2022;17:465–81. https://doi.org/10.2217/fmb-2021-0158.
Colvin KM, et al. The Pel and Psl polysaccharides provide Pseudomonas aeruginosa structural redundancy within the biofilm matrix. Environ Microbiol. 2012;14:1913–28. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1462-2920.2011.02657.x.
Guillaume O, Butnarasu C, Visentin S, Reimhult E. Interplay between biofilm microenvironment and pathogenicity of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in cystic fibrosis lung chronic infection. Biofilm. 2022;4:100089. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioflm.2022.100089.
Chung J, Eisha S, Park S, Morris AJ, Martin I. How three self-secreted biofilm exopolysaccharides of Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Psl, Pel, and Alginate, can each be exploited for antibiotic adjuvant effects in cystic fibrosis lung infection. Int J Mol Sci. 2023;24:8709. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24108709.
Ma LZ, Wang D, Liu Y, Zhang Z, Wozniak DJ. Regulation of Biofilm Exopolysaccharide Biosynthesis and Degradation in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Annu Rev Microbiol. 2022;76:413–33. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-micro-041320-111355.
Franklin MJ, Nivens DE, Weadge JT, Howell PL. Biosynthesis of the Pseudomonas aeruginosa extracellular polysaccharides, Alginate, Pel, and Psl. Front Microbiol. 2011. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2011.00167.
Tielen P, Strathmann M, Jaeger K-E, Flemming H-C, Wingender J. Alginate acetylation influences initial surface colonization by mucoid Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Microbiol Res. 2005;160:165–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micres.2004.11.003.
Bonneau A, Roche B, Schalk IJ. Iron acquisition in Pseudomonas aeruginosa by the siderophore pyoverdine: an intricate interacting network including periplasmic and membrane proteins. Sci Rep. 2020;10:120. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-56913-x.
Martin LW, Reid DW, Sharples KJ, Lamont IL. Pseudomonas siderophores in the sputum of patients with cystic fibrosis. Biometals. 2011;24:1059–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10534-011-9464-z.
Jyot J, et al. Type II secretion system of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. In vivo evidence of a significant role in death due to lung infection. J Infect Dis. 2011;203:1369–77. https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jir045.
Korotkov KV, Sandkvist M, Hol WGJ. The type II secretion system: biogenesis, molecular architecture and mechanism. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2012;10:336–51. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro2762.
Ball G, Durand É, Lazdunski A, Filloux A. A novel type II secretion system in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Mol Microbiol. 2002;43:475–85. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2958.2002.02759.x.
Sawa T, Shimizu M, Moriyama K, Wiener-Kronish JP. Association between Pseudomonas aeruginosa type III secretion, antibiotic resistance, and clinical outcome: a review. Crit Care. 2014;18:668. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-014-0668-9.
Bleves S, Viarre V, Salacha R, Michel GPF, Filloux A, Voulhoux R. Protein secretion systems in Pseudomonas aeruginosa: a wealth of pathogenic weapons. Int J Med Microbiol. 2010;300:534–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmm.2010.08.005.
Cai X, Wang R, Filloux A, Waksman G, Meng G. Structural and functional characterization of Pseudomonas aeruginosa CupB Chaperones. PLoS ONE. 2011;6:e16583. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0016583.
Chen L, Zou Y, She P, Wu Y. Composition, function, and regulation of T6SS in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Microbiol Res. 2015;172:19–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micres.2015.01.004.
Chen L, Zou Y, Kronfl AA, Wu Y. Type VI secretion system of Pseudomonas aeruginosa is associated with biofilm formation but not environmental adaptation. Microbiologyopen. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1002/mbo3.991.
Zulianello L, Canard C, Köhler T, Caille D, Lacroix J-S, Meda P. Rhamnolipids are virulence factors that promote early infiltration of primary human airway epithelia by Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Infect Immun. 2006;74:3134–47. https://doi.org/10.1128/IAI.01772-05.
Halldorsson S, Gudjonsson T, Gottfredsson M, Singh PK, Gudmundsson GH, Baldursson O. Azithromycin maintains airway epithelial integrity during Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection. Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol. 2010;42:62–8. https://doi.org/10.1165/rcmb.2008-0357OC.
Alfiniyah C, Bees MA, Wood AJ. Quorum machinery: effect of the las system in rhl regulation of P. aeruginosa. AIP Conf Proc. 2019;2192:060001. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5139147.
Fuqua C, Parsek MR, Greenberg EP. Regulation of gene expression by cell-to-cell communication: acyl-homoserine lactone quorum sensing. Annu Rev Genet. 2001;35:439–68. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.genet.35.102401.090913.
Girard G, Bloemberg GV. Central role of quorum sensing in regulating the production of pathogenicity factors in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Future Microbiol. 2008;3:97–106. https://doi.org/10.2217/17460913.3.1.97.
Lee J, Zhang L. The hierarchy quorum sensing network in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Protein Cell. 2015;6:26–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13238-014-0100-x.
del Barrio-Tofiño E, et al. Genomics and susceptibility profiles of extensively drug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates from Spain. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01589-17.
Kocsis B, Gulyás D, Szabó D. Diversity and distribution of resistance markers in Pseudomonas aeruginosa international high-risk clones. Microorganisms. 2021;9:359. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms9020359.
Stanton RA, et al. Whole-genome sequencing reveals diversity of carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa collected through CDC’s Emerging Infections Program, United States, 2016–2018. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1128/aac.00496-22.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the Department of Medicine of Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona for their support of E.S PhD studies and the Spanish Society of Infectious Diseases that has supported E.S with a training/mobility grant to conduct her PhD studies and Janet Dawson for English language editing.
Funding
Open Access funding provided thanks to the CRUE-CSIC agreement with Springer Nature. This study was co-financed by competitive grants from Fondo de Investigaciones Sanitarias at the Spanish government’s National Institute of Health Research, (projects FIS PI21/00509 and PI21/00753), funded by Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII), co-funded by the European Union. The study was also funded by a research grant from the Spanish Society of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology (SEIMC). The work is also supported by the Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red Enfermedades Infecciosas (CIBERINFEC) (CB21/13/00002, CB21/13/00099), Instituto de Salud Carlos III (Madrid, Spain), co-funded by the European Union. E.S is the recipient of a Río Hortega grant (contract CM22/00008) funded by Instituto de Salud Carlos III and cofunded by the European Union – NextGenerationEU.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
ES: Conceptualization, Investigation, Writing – original draft. AFN: Investigation, Writing – original draft. LZ: Investigation, Writing-original draft. AO: Supervision, Validation, Writing – review & editing; editing. JPH: Supervision, Validation, Writing-review and editing. CJ: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Supervision, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing; editing.SG-Z: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Supervision, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing-review and editing.
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Sendra, E., Fernández-Muñoz, A., Zamorano, L. et al. Impact of multidrug resistance on the virulence and fitness of Pseudomonas aeruginosa: a microbiological and clinical perspective. Infection (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s15010-024-02313-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s15010-024-02313-x