Next Article in Journal
Mechanisms of Antimicrobial Peptides from Bagasse against Human Pathogenic Bacteria
Previous Article in Journal
One Health Surveillance of Antimicrobial Use and Resistance: Challenges and Successes of Implementing Surveillance Programs in Sri Lanka
Previous Article in Special Issue
Occurrence of Antimicrobial-Resistant Escherichia coli in Marine Mammals of the North and Baltic Seas: Sentinels for Human Health
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Antibiotics
Volume 12
Issue 3
10.3390/antibiotics12030447
antibiotics-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

ESBL-Positive Enterobacteriaceae from Dogs of Santiago and Boa Vista Islands, Cape Verde: A Public Health Concern

by
Alice Matos
1,2,3,
Eva Cunha
2,3,*,
Lara Baptista
4,
Luís Tavares
2,3 and
Manuela Oliveira
1,2,3
1
Veterinários Sem Fronteiras, Av. da Universidade Técnica, 1300-477 Lisboa, Portugal
2
CIISA—Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Lisbon, Av. da Universidade Técnica, 1300-477 Lisboa, Portugal
3
Associate Laboratory for Animal and Veterinary Sciences (AL4AnimalS), 1300-477 Lisboa, Portugal
4
Bons Amigos, Achada Grande Trás, Cidade da Praia 7603, Santiago Island, Cape Verde
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Antibiotics 2023, 12(3), 447; https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics12030447
Submission received: 27 January 2023 / Revised: 14 February 2023 / Accepted: 21 February 2023 / Published: 23 February 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Antimicrobial and Antimicrobial Resistance in the Environment – 2nd Volume)
Browse Figure
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Antimicrobial resistance is a public health threat with an increasing expression in low- and middle-income countries such as Cape Verde. In this country, there is an overpopulation of dogs, which may facilitate the spread of resistant bacteria, including extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Enterobacteriaceae. To clarify the role of dogs as reservoirs for the dissemination of this bacterial group, 100 rectal swab samples were collected from confined (n = 50) and non-confined (n = 50) dogs in Santiago and Boa Vista Islands, Cape Verde. These were analyzed using conventional bacteriological techniques for the detection of ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae and characterization of their pathogenic and resistance profiles. Twenty-nine samples displayed ESBL-positive bacteria, from which 48 ESBL-producing isolates were obtained and mostly identified as Escherichia coli. Multiple antimicrobial resistance indexes ranged from 0.18 to 0.70 and half of the isolates were classified as multidrug-resistant. Isolates were capable of producing relevant virulence factors, including biofilm, showing virulence indexes between 0.29 and 0.71. As such, dogs in Cape Verde may act as reservoirs of resistant bacteria, including pathogenic and zoonotic species, representing a public health concern. Although further investigation is needed, this study proposes the periodical analysis of dogs’ fecal samples to monitor resistance dissemination in the country, in a One-Health perspective.

1. Introduction

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global growing threat that compromises the achievement of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by endangering public health, food security, and economic growth [1]. Accordingly, in 2017, the WHO published a list of priority antimicrobial-resistant bacteria to guide research, in which extended spectrum β-lactamases (ESBL)-positive Enterobacteriaceae are included in the critical priority group [2]. They are also classified as a serious threat by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [3].
According to Bush–Jacoby updated functional classification, ESBL enzymes belong to group 2be and are associated with the resistance of bacteria to penicillins and cephalosporins as well as to their capability to hydrolyze one or more oxyimino-beta-lactams, such as cefotaxime, ceftazidime, or aztreonam [4]. ESBL enzymes are more or less effectively hydrolyzed by lactamase inhibitors, depending on the specific enzyme—TEM and SHV are better hydrolyzed by clavulanic acid while CTX-M is more successfully inhibited by tazobactam [4]. Although some ESBL isolates are susceptible to third generation cephalosporins in vitro, treatment with these antimicrobials may result in clinical failure [5], representing a concerning decrease in treatment options for infections caused by ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae.
Even though infectious diseases are an important cause of mortality in Cape Verde [6,7], the country is still lacking resources for infection control [8]. Furthermore, due to economic constrains, the use of antimicrobials is restricted to a few broad-spectrum compounds, and is mostly based on empirical prescription according to the patient’s clinical situation [6,8]. Moreover, there is under-reporting of clinical cases, which makes it difficult to assess the country’s real epidemiological situation, as well as the actual burden of disease [9] and the level of antimicrobial resistance. A five-year retrospective study of two hospitals in Cape Verde showed an alarming rise in resistant bacteria, namely of ESBL-producing strains [6]; however, information about this problem in Cape Verde is still scarce, especially in the veterinary setting.
Although bacteria are capable of developing a resistance profile naturally [10], this phenomenon has been accelerated by the overuse and misuse of antimicrobials, which may lead to selective pressure and acquired resistance [11]. As a consequence of the increasing reports of community-acquired resistant bacteria in humans [12,13,14], in addition to factors associated with hospital facilities and antimicrobial consumption, more attention has been given to different AMR sources and drivers, including overpopulation, poor sanitation, and lack of an efficient sewage-disposal system, which are phenomena observed in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) [15,16,17], such as Cape Verde [18]. In addition, recent studies indicated the possible linkage between resistant bacteria of pets and their owners, or even unrelated humans. In fact, some authors demonstrated the co-carriage of antimicrobial-resistant bacteria between these hosts [19,20,21,22], while others showed that pathogenic bacteria harboring the same resistant genes, including blaCTX-M and blaTEM, are not species-specific, and therefore similar strains are capable of causing infection in both humans and companion animals [23,24,25,26]. Furthermore, dog feces are largely believed to be responsible for the transfer of pathogenic bacteria [27], as well as of resistant strains and genes [28,29,30] from one host to another. Accordingly, the fecal–oral route has been indicated as the main route for transmission of resistant pathogens such as those belonging to Enterobacteriaceae at the community level [15,31], which is sustained by the lack of hygiene practices [32].
Although official records of dog population numbers are lacking in Cape Verde, stray dogs are known to be a big concern on almost every island of the archipelago [33], especially in urban areas where food and other essential resources are more accessible [34]. These dogs live in close contact with humans and with hospital and municipal residues and wastewater, which can be high-risk contamination sources of antimicrobials [17,35]. As such, these animals are prone to develop and carry resistant bacteria, which can be disseminated through their fecal material to the community [27,28,29,30].
More studies on antimicrobial resistance dissemination need to be performed in LMICs, focusing on different AMR sources and drivers, including on companion animals. As such, this study aimed to evaluate the presence of ESBL-positive Enterobacteriaceae in dog feces in Cape Verde and to identify possible associations between ESBL-production and dogs’ lifestyle characteristics.

2. Results

Most of the sampled animals were female dogs (56%), between one and five years old (75%) (Supplementary Materials Table S1). None of the sampled animals showed evident gastrointestinal signs of disease. Data regarding the spay/neuter status, the presence of external parasites, and the body-condition score of animals sampled at two different locations are highlighted on Table 1.
From the 100 samples collected, 66 gave positive cultures in ChromID®ESBL agar, resulting in 114 isolates. Despite that, after isolate identification and ESBL-production confirmation testing, only 48 isolates, obtained from 29 dogs, corresponded to ESBL-positive Enterobacteriaceae (Table S2). Eleven of these dogs displayed more than one positive isolate. These were identified as Escherichia coli (n = 29; 60.42%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 4; 8.33%), Morganella morganii (n = 4; 8.33%), Citrobacter freundii (n = 3; 6.25%), Proteus mirabilis (n = 3; 6.25%), Escherichia vulneris (n = 3; 6.25%), Enterobacter cloacae (n = 1; 2.08%), and Proteus sp. (n = 1; 2.08%).

2.1. Characterization of the Isolates’ Antimicrobial-Resistance Profile

Besides being resistant or intermediately resistant (n = 48; 100%) to ampicillin, cefotaxime, and ceftaroline, as observed after modified double-disk synergy testing, all ESBL-positive isolates were also frequently resistant or intermediately resistant to enrofloxacin (n = 38; 79%), doxycycline (n = 30; 32%), and amoxicillin/clavulanate (n = 24; 50%). On the other hand, all isolates were susceptible to gentamicin (120 µg) and meropenem (Table 2). Despite that, 94% (n = 45) of the isolates were resistant or intermediately resistant to at least one antimicrobial class besides β-lactams and excluding antimicrobial compounds for which intrinsic resistance is described for Enterobacteriaceae. Moreover, 50% (n = 24) of the isolates were classified as multidrug-resistant (MDR) considering their non-susceptibility to three or more antimicrobial classes [36].
The multiple antimicrobial resistance (MAR) indexes ranged between 0.18 and 0.70 (Table S3), with only one isolate displaying an index below 0.20. The highest mean value was displayed by the K. pneumoniae isolates (MAR index mean value = 0.65), followed by C. freundii (MAR index mean value = 0.59), M. morganii (MAR index mean value = 0.57), E. coli (MAR index mean value = 0.42), P. mirabilis (MAR index mean value = 0.41), Proteus sp. (MAR index value = 0.33), E. cloacae (MAR index value = 0.33), and E. vulneris (MAR index mean value = 0.27).
No significant differences between MAR index values from isolates obtained from dogs of different groups (dogs from different locations, dogs with different confinement status, dogs with different body condition score, and dogs with and without external parasites) were detected (p > 0.05).

2.2. Characterization of the Isolates’ Virulence Profile

Most isolates were able to produce lipase (n = 44; 91.67%), hemolysins (n = 37; 77.08%), and biofilm (n = 27; 56.25%), but other virulence factors were not as commonly expressed by the isolates, including DNase (n = 18; 37.50%), gelatinase (n = 12; 25.00%), and protease (n = 11; 22.92%) (Table S3). None of the isolates was positive for lecithinase production.
The Proteus sp. isolate showed the highest virulence index (V. index value = 0.71), followed by P. mirabilis (V. index mean value = 0.57), and K. pneumoniae (V. index mean value = 0.54). Lower V. indexes were displayed by Citrobacter freundii (V. index mean value = 0.48), M. morganii (V. index mean value = 0.46), E. coli (V. index mean value = 0.42), E. cloacae (V. index value = 0.29), and E. vulneris (V. index mean value = 0.29). Virulence indexes varied between 0.29 and 0.71.
No significant differences in virulence index values from isolates originated from dogs from different groups (dogs with different confinement status, dogs with different body condition score, and dogs with and without external parasites) were detected (p > 0.05), except for isolates from different sampling locations (p = 0.006).
Correlation between isolates’ MAR index and V. index was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). MAR index values showed no significant differences between biofilm-producing isolates (MAR index mean value = 0.47) and non-producers (MAR index mean value = 0.41) (p > 0.05). However, biofilm production was found to be significantly related to MDR profile (p = 0.042; OR = 3.4; 95% CI 1.03–11.26).

3. Discussion

To the best of the authors’ knowledge this is the first study on ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae isolated from fecal samples of dogs from Cape Verde, providing not only relevant information on the intestinal microbiota of these dogs, but also exposing possible risks for both animal and public health.
Samples were obtained using rectal swabs with Amies transport medium (VWR™, Leuven, Belgium), which is described as effective and reliable for fecal bacterial isolation [37,38]. The isolates were kept refrigerated at 4 °C, allowing a delayed analysis and a long-distance transportation [38,39].
Detection of ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae was done using a selective chromogenic agar (ChromID®ESBL agar). In agreement with our results, this selective and chromogenic medium is considered a sensitive, but not very specific, method for rapid detection and presumptive identification of ESBL-positive isolates [40,41,42], which emphasizes the importance of doing a confirmatory test for a correct detection of this resistance mechanism. Considering that other authors reported false-negative results in the confirmatory test recommended by CLSI [43] associated with AmpC β-lactamase production, in the present study the modified double-disk synergy test was performed instead, using also cefepime, which is stable to AmpC hydrolysis [44,45,46,47]. None of the isolates under study seemed to be co-producer of ESBL or AmpC.
The high-occurrence of ESBL-positive bacteria among the sampled dogs may be related to their potential contact with specific drivers and contaminated environments, such as urban residues and hospital wastewater [17,35]. Even though p values were above 0.05, the frequency of ESBL-positive samples was higher in dogs from Praia, in not-confined dogs, in dogs presenting external parasites, and in dogs with poor body condition. It is also important to notice that the chi-square test of dependency between ESBL and the external parasites and body condition variables displayed p values of 0.06, which points to the need to evaluate a larger animal population in future research. Additionally, none of the sampled animals showed gastrointestinal signs, which is in agreement with previous findings that healthy animals, without diarrhea, can also be ESBL carriers and act as reservoirs [26,48,49].
Among the confirmed ESBL-positive Enterobacteriaceae isolates, E. coli was the most prevalent species, as frequently reported in human and veterinary medicine and widely described as the cause of unsuccessful therapies in humans [26,50]. Accordingly, the identified bacterial species correspond to opportunistic pathogens responsible for intestinal and extraintestinal diseases, being associated with mild to severe infections in small-animal clinical practice [51,52], but also implied in a myriad of infections in humans, including urinary-tract infections, pneumonia, and septicemia, either hospital- or community-acquired [12,13,14,53,54].
Antimicrobial susceptibility profiles of the isolates under study are of special concern since the isolates tested were resistant to antimicrobials that are frequently used in both human and veterinary medicine [55,56], with results similar to those reported in human medicine.
According to CLSI guidelines [57], despite their susceptibility profiles, all isolates must be declared resistant to penicillins, cephalosporins and aztreonam once identified as ESBL-producers. In addition, 50% of the isolates showed no susceptibility to amoxicillin/clavulanate, demonstrating that ESBL-producing bacteria can develop resistance to more molecules, as previously reported [58,59]. Another relevant result was the lack of susceptibility to fluoroquinolones, namely to enrofloxacin, but also to ciprofloxacin. High occurrence of fluoroquinolones resistance among ESBL-positive isolates has already been reported in humans by Kantele et al. [60] and in dogs Johansson et al. [61], who suggested that this phenomena can be due to conjugative spread of bla genes by plasmid transfer.
Doxycycline was also included in this study because it is widely used in Cape Verde to treat a variety of bacterial infections in both veterinary and human medicine [62,63,64]. Resistance to this antimicrobial has already been reported among ESBL-positive Enterobacteriaceae species isolated from humans and dogs [65,66], which is in agreement with this study’s results.
Nitrofurantoin is considered very effective against E. coli [67,68] and a reasonable alternative to fluoroquinolones and β-lactams in the treatment of UTIs in human medicine and small-animal clinical practice [67,69,70]. As expected, all E. coli isolates were susceptible to this antimicrobial, and only three K. pneumoniae isolates were resistant to nitrofurantoin.
In addition to the numerous reports of high-level gentamicin-resistant Enterococcus faecum isolates from both humans and companion animals [71,72,73,74], there are also few reports of high-level aminoglycoside resistance among Enterobacteriaceae [75,76]. In the present study, 40% of the tested isolates were not susceptible to low-content gentamicin disks (10 µg), but none were high-level gentamicin-resistant, which points to the importance of establishing proper doses regarding antimicrobial therapy.
Although there are increasing reports of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae in veterinary and human medicine [77,78,79,80,81], all isolates were susceptible to meropenem, which seems to indicate that resistance to this last-resort antimicrobial is not a major problem in Cape Verde.
Genes encoding for resistance strategies can be horizontally transferred between bacteria, mainly via plasmids, thus enabling bacteria to display a wide range of mechanisms [60]. Conjugative plasmid-exchange might contribute to the high percentage (50%) of MDR ESBL isolates observed in this study, although to confirm this hypothesis it would be necessary to perform the molecular characterization of these isolates.
Expression of virulence determinants by bacteria also influences clinical presentations and outcomes of associated infections, and plays a very important role in bacteria’s pathogenic potential by enabling the microorganism to invade the host and cause disease [82]. In the present study, most of the isolates showed capacity to produce lipases, hemolysins, and biofilms, which are surface-attached bacterial communities wrapped in an amorphous polysaccharide matrix that acts as a shield [83,84,85]. This ability enhances bacterial dissemination, confers survival advantages to host defenses, and is responsible for increased antimicrobial resistance through various mechanisms [83,86,87], which may explain why the isolates under study that were able to produce biofilms showed a statistically significant likelihood of being MDR.
The present study demonstrated that fecal carriage of ESBL, MDR, and potentially pathogenic bacteria may occur among dogs from Cape Verde, independently of their confinement and health status. Considering that, in the locations where this study was performed, most of the dogs, including the confined ones, defecate in public streets that are not often cleaned, the carriage of resistant bacteria by these animals may represent a public and environmental health problem, as suggested previously [29,30,88,89]. In addition, several authors have suggested that some bacteria, including Enterobacteriaceae species found in the present study, can act as zoonotic agents, enabling the transfer of relevant antimicrobial resistance and virulence determinants between bacteria of dogs and humans [19,20,21,22,24,25,89,90]. Therefore this study represents the first step towards the understanding of the actual role of dogs as AMR reservoirs in Cape Verde.
It is important to highlight that sample size depended on the clinical appointments in each rescue association during the time period available for sample collection, and not on the dog population size in each location, which is still uncertain, meaning the dataset has some limitations regarding representability. Another limitation of the present study is the lack of information regarding previous hospitalizations and therapies administered to the animals, which can influence the fecal carriage of ESBL at the time of the collection [91,92]. Possible miscommunication with owners about dog’s confinement status may also have had an impact on the lack of association between confinement status and ESBL-positive samples. Moreover, the available data do not provide information about the isolates genetic relatedness and epidemiology, and this should be considered in future studies.

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Sampling Area

Sampling was performed between September and December 2021, in two different locations of Cape Verde (Figure 1): Bons Amigos Association, located in the municipality of Praia (14°55′15″ N, 23°30′30″ W), Santiago Island, and Nerina Association, located in Sal Rei (16°10’45” N, 22°55’ W), Boa Vista Island.
Praia is one of the nine municipalities of Santiago Island, with more than 140,000 inhabitants [93] sharing 258 km2 [94]. Praia has a high urbanization level (97.1%), one hospital and six public-health care centers. Boa Vista Island is 631 km2 but has only one municipality, Boa Vista, with a total of 12,613 residents corresponding to less than 3% of the national resident population [64]. Boa Vista has an urbanization level of 86.7%, and only one public-health care center. Animal density in both location is difficult to determine, and it was estimated that there were about 20,000 dogs in Praia and 2000 in Boa Vista [95].

4.2. Sample Collection

Samples were collected during clinical check-ups or during spay/neuter campaigns organized by the two associations. In each location, fifty dog fecal samples—half confined (C) and half not confined (NC)—were collected. Confined dogs are defined as those who lived in a household and were able to go out only with a dog leash, while non-confined dogs were free-roaming, independent of their ownership. No other inclusion criteria were considered.
After cleaning the perineal area using wipes to avoid contamination from the surrounding skin [96], samples were collected using a sterile swab (VWR™, Leuven, Belgium), inserted approximately 2 cm into the dog’s rectum [37] and gently rotated. Immediately after, the swab was placed in the respective tube containing Amies media (VWR™, Leuven, Belgium), and refrigerated at 4 °C until transport and further processing at the Laboratory of Microbiology and Immunology of the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Lisbon, Portugal.
Complementary animal data, including age (≤0.5 years; ≤1 years; ≤5 years; >5 years), sex (male/female), body condition score (1—severely underweight; 2—underweight; 3—ideal weight; 4—overweight; 5—obese), spay/neuter status (yes/no), presence of external parasites (yes/no), and major clinical signs, were also registered. It was not possible to record information regarding previous antimicrobial therapy or hospitalizations.

4.3. Isolation and Identification of ESBL-Positive Bacteria

Samples were inoculated on Brain–Heart Infusion (BHI) broth and incubated at 37 °C for 24 h. All suspensions were then inoculated on a selective chromogenic agar (chromID® ESBL, bioMérieux, Linda-a-Velha, Portugal) and incubated at 37 °C for 24 h, to isolate the ESBL-positive bacteria. After incubation, the color of colonies was recorded, and bacteria were isolated in BHI agar before further testing.
Isolates were characterized considering their macroscopic morphology on ChromID®ESBL according to the manufacturer’s instructions (bioMérieux, Linda-a-Velha, Portugal), Gram staining, lactose-fermentation capability on MacConkey agar (Oxoid, Hampshire, UK), and oxidase production. Biochemical identification was performed by IMViC testing [97] or, in case of inconclusive result by IMViC, API 20E (bioMérieux, Linda-a-Velha, Portugal) galleries were used according to manufacturer’s instructions.

4.4. Evaluation of Isolates’ Antibiotic-Resistance Profile

To avoid false-negative results due to AmpC β-lactamase production, Enterobacteriaceae isolates were submitted to a modified double-disk synergy test to confirm ESBL production using four antimicrobials, namely two third-generation cephalosporins, cefotaxime (CTX, 30 µg) and ceftazidime (CAZ, 30 µg), a fourth-generation cephalosporin, cefepime (FEP, 30 µg), and amoxicillin/clavulanate (AMC, 30 µg). Antimicrobial disks were placed 20 mm apart, on the surface of a Mueller–Hinton agar plate previously inoculated with 0.5 MacFarland bacterial suspensions [44,45,46,47]. A positive result was recorded when, after 24 h incubation at 37 °C, a decreased susceptibility to the tested cephalosporins was detected together with a key-hole-shaped halo in the AMC disk, as a result of higher inhibition [45]. Klebsiella pneumoniae CFCT 7787 [98] and the reference strain E. coli ATCC® 25922™ were used as positive and negative controls, respectively [46].
The disk diffusion method was performed to determine the isolates’ susceptibility profile, according to the Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). Eleven different antimicrobial compounds used in veterinary and human medicine, belonging to five different classes were tested: β-lactams, namely cephalosporins (third-generation—cefotaxime CTX, 30 µg and fifth-generation—ceftaroline CPT, 30 µg), penicillins (ampicillin AMP, 10 µg), penicillins in combination with a β-lactamase inhibitor (amoxicillin/clavulanate AMC, 30 µg), and carbapenems (meropenem MEM, 10 µg); aminoglycosides (gentamicin CN, 120 µg and 10 µg); fluoroquinolones (ciprofloxacin CIP, 5 µg, and enrofloxacin ENR 5 µg); nitrofurans (nitrofurantoin F, 100 µg); and tetracyclines (doxycycline DO, 30 µg). Antimicrobial disks were placed in the surface of a Mueller–Hinton agar plate previously inoculated with 0.5 MacFarland bacterial suspensions, which were incubated 24 h at 37 °C. Then, inhibition zones were measured and scored according to CLSI guidelines as susceptible, intermediate, or resistant [43,57]. The reference strain E. coli ATCC®25922™ was used for quality control, and a 10% replica was performed.
Multiple antimicrobial resistance (MAR) indexes were calculated as the quotient between the number of antimicrobials to which isolates were resistant and the number of antimicrobials tested [99].

4.5. Phenotypic Evaluation of Isolates’ Virulence Profile

Isolates’ virulence profile was also assessed for the ESBL-positive isolates by evaluating the production of certain enzymes related to the bacteria’s pathogenic potential. A 10% replica was performed.
Hemolysin expression was determined using Columbia agar plates supplemented with 5% sheep blood (bioMérieux, Linda-a-Velha, Portugal). DNase production ability was determined using DNase medium (Thermo Scientific™ Remel™, Porto Salvo, Portugal) supplemented with 0.01% toluidine blue O reagent, using Staphylococcus aureus, ATCC® 25923™ and E. coli, ATCC® 25922™ as positive and negative control, respectively. Lipase production was assessed using Spirit Blue (Difco™, BD Life Sciences, Vaud, Switzerland) agar added with a lipid source, olive oil, and Tween®80, using Pseudomonas aeruginosa ATCC® 27853™ as positive control and a P. aeruginosa Z25.1 clinical isolate from a diabetic foot infection as negative control. Lecithinase activity was determined using tryptic soy agar supplemented with 10% egg yolk emulsion (VWR™, Leuven, Belgium), with P. aeruginosa ATCC® 27853™ and E. coli ATCC®25922™ acting as positive and negative controls, respectively [99,100]. For evaluation of protease production, skim-milk powder (Oxoid, Hampshire, United Kingdom) supplemented with bacteriological agar (VWR™, Leuven, Belgium) was used, with P. aeruginosa ATCC® 27853™ (positive) and S. aureus ATCC® 29213™ (negative) being tested as controls [99]. Gelatinase activity was detected using Nutrient Gelatin Agar (Oxoid, Hampshire, United Kingdom), using P. aeruginosa Z25.1, a clinical isolate from a diabetic foot infection, and E. coli ATCC® 25922™, as positive and negative controls, respectively [100]. Finally, biofilm formation was assessed using Congo red agar plates, composed of BHI broth (VWR™, Leuven, Belgium), bacteriological agar (VWR™, Leuven, Belgium), Red Congo reagent (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA), and sucrose, and P. aeruginosa ATCC® 27853™ (positive) and E. coli ATCC® 25922™ (negative) as controls.
Virulence indices were calculated according to Fernandes et al. [99] as the quotient between the number of positive virulence factors expressed by an isolate and the number of virulence factors tested.

4.6. Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was performed using R commander (R© v. 4.2.1 GUI 1.79).
The chi-square test was done to evaluate the dependency between ESBL production and possible animal-related predictors such as sampling location, confinement status, presence of external parasites, and body condition, and to analyze the association between biofilm production by the isolates under study and other virulence factors, as well as between biofilm production and the detection of a multidrug-resistance profile. Fisher’s exact test was used instead of chi-square when test assumptions were not met, and odds ratio was determined to measure these associations.
The Wilcoxon rank sum test was performed to test differences between MAR and virulence indexes of dogs from Praia and Boa Vista, confined and not confined dogs, with and without external parasites, and dogs with different body condition. The same test was used to assess possible differences between MAR index values of biofilm producers and non-producers. The Spearman’s correlation test was performed to analyze the correlation between the MAR index and virulence index.
Significant differences were calculated at 0.05 (two-tailed) levels of significance.

5. Conclusions

Our study revealed a high frequency of MDR and ESBL-producing isolates among dogs in two islands of the Cape Verde archipelago. This resistance phenotype was found in samples from different groups, suggesting its association with various risk factors, including population density and inefficient sewage and residues disposal, which should be explored in future studies.
Furthermore, the results of the present work will hopefully encourage further investigation on the role of companion animals as antimicrobial resistance reservoirs in Cape Verde, specifically by performing molecular characterization of the isolates and a public-health risk assessment. It could be beneficial to perform periodic analysis of dogs’ fecal samples with the aim of obtaining relevant information to track AMR tendencies, in an One-Health perspective, and it is urgent to start analyzing human clinical and non-clinical isolates to identify related trends.
Finally, dog-population-management initiatives, including reproduction control, community education campaigns and legislation, are essential to reduce the base problem of dog overpopulation in this country.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/antibiotics12030447/s1, Table S1: Sampling data; Table S2: Results of the ESBL screening and confirmation, and identification protocols of the Enterobacteriaceae isolates; Table S3: Antimicrobial resistance and virulence profiles of the isolates under study.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.M., L.B. and M.O.; methodology, A.M., E.C. and M.O.; validation, L.T. and M.O.; formal analysis, A.M. and E.C.; investigation, A.M.; resources, L.T. and M.O.; data curation, A.M. and M.O.; writing—original draft preparation, A.M.; writing—review and editing, A.M., L.B., E.C., L.T. and M.O.; visualization, A.M.; supervision, L.B. and M.O.; project administration, M.O.; funding acquisition, A.M., L.T. and M.O. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by CIISA—Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Lisbon, Project UIDB/00276/2020 (Funded by FCT); and by the Associate Laboratory for Animal and Veterinary Sciences (LA/P/0059/2020—AL4AnimalS).

Institutional Review Board Statement

All animals were cared for according to the rules given by the current EU (Directive 2010/63/EC) and national (DL 113/2013) legislation and by the competent authority (Direção Geral de Alimentação e Veterinária, DGAV, www.dgv.min-agricultura.pt/portal/page/portal/DGV) in Portugal. Only noninvasive samples were collected during routine procedures with consent of owners, and no ethics committee approval was needed. Trained veterinarians obtained all the samples, following standard routine procedures. No animal experiment has been performed in the scope of this research.

Informed Consent Statement

Verbal informed consent was obtained from all the owners. As some of the participants in the study were unaccustomed to dealing with forms, all the necessary information about the study was provided to all the participants before obtaining their consent.

Data Availability Statement

The datasets used and/or analyzed in the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the team of the Laboratory of Microbiology and Immunology from the Veterinary Faculty of the University of Lisbon, Bons Amigos Association team, and Nerina Association team, particularly Laura Sanchéz. The authors would also like to recognize Veterinários Sem Fronteiras Portugal for the opportunity to collaborate with the mentioned associations.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. WHO. Antimicrobial Resistance: Fact Sheet on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Health Targets; World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  2. WHO. Pubishes List of Bacteria for which New Antibiotics Are Urgently Needed. Available online: https://www.who.int/news/item/27-02-2017-who-publishes-list-of-bacteria-for-which-new-antibiotics-are-urgently-needed (accessed on 20 September 2022).
  3. CDC. Antibiotic Resistance Threats in the United States; Centers for Disease Control and Presention: Atlanta, GA, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  4. Bush, K.; Jacoby, G.A. Updated Functional Classification of β-Lactamases. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2010, 54, 969–976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Rawat, D.; Nair, D. Extended-Spectrum β-Lactamases in Gram Negative Bacteria. J. Glob. Infect. Dis. 2010, 2, 263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Monteiro, T.; Wysocka, M.; Tellez, E.; Monteiro, O.; Spencer, L.; Veiga, E.; Monteiro, S.; de Pina, C.; Gonçalves, D.; de Pina, S.; et al. A Five-Year Retrospective Study Shows Increasing Rates of Antimicrobial Drug Resistance in Cabo Verde for Both Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli. J. Glob. Antimicrob. Resist. 2020, 22, 483–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Sanchez, S.; Stevenson, M.A.M.; Hudson, C.R.; Maier, M.; Buffington, T.; Dam, Q.; Maurer, J.J. Characterization of Multidrug-Resistant Escherichia coli Isolates Associated with Nosocomial Infections in Dogs. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2002, 40, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Lanza, V.F.; Tedim, A.P.; Martínez, J.L.; Baquero, F.; Coque, T.M. The Plasmidome of Firmicutes: Impact on the Emergence and the Spread of Resistance to Antimicrobials. Microbiol. Spectr. 2015, 3, PLAS-0039-2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Furtado da Luz, E.; Braga, J.U. Under-Reporting of Tuberculosis in Praia, Cape Verde, from 2006 to 2012. Int. J. Tuberc. Lung Dis. 2018, 22, 258–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Zhuang, M.; Achmon, Y.; Cao, Y.; Liang, X.; Chen, L.; Wang, H.; Siame, B.A.; Leung, K.Y. Distribution of Antibiotic Resistance Genes in the Environment. Environ. Pollut. 2021, 285, 117402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. The World Bank in Cape Verde. Available online: https://www.worldbank.org/pt/country/caboverde/overview#1 (accessed on 20 September 2022).
  12. Fan, N.-C.; Chen, H.-H.; Chen, C.-L.; Ou, L.-S.; Lin, T.-Y.; Tsai, M.-H.; Chiu, C.-H. Rise of Community-Onset Urinary Tract Infection Caused by Extended-Spectrum β-Lactamase-Producing Escherichia coli in Children. J. Microbiol. Immunol. Infect. 2014, 47, 399–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Kassakian, S.Z.; Mermel, L.A. Changing Epidemiology of Infections Due to Extended Spectrum Beta-Lactamase Producing Bacteria. Antimicrob. Resist. Infect. Control 2014, 3, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Goyal, D.; Dean, N.; Neill, S.; Jones, P.; Dascomb, K. Risk Factors for Community-Acquired Extended-Spectrum Beta-Lactamase–Producing Enterobacteriaceae Infections—A Retrospective Study of Symptomatic Urinary Tract Infections. Open Forum Infect. Dis. 2019, 6, ofy357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Aslam, B.; Wang, W.; Arshad, M.I.; Khurshid, M.; Muzammil, S.; Rasool, M.H.; Nisar, M.A.; Alvi, R.F.; Aslam, M.A.; Qamar, M.U.; et al. Antibiotic Resistance: A Rundown of a Global Crisis. IDR 2018, 11, 1645–1658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Machowska, A.; Stålsby Lundborg, C. Drivers of Irrational Use of Antibiotics in Europe. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 16, 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Vikesland, P.; Garner, E.; Gupta, S.; Kang, S.; Maile-Moskowitz, A.; Zhu, N. Differential Drivers of Antimicrobial Resistance across the World. Acc. Chem. Res. 2019, 52, 916–924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Data for Lower Middle Income, Cabo Verde. Available online: https://data.worldbank.org/?locations=XN-CV (accessed on 20 September 2022).
  19. Marques, C.; Belas, A.; Aboim, C.; Cavaco-Silva, P.; Trigueiro, G.; Gama, L.T.; Pomba, C. Evidence of Sharing of Klebsiella pneumoniae Strains between Healthy Companion Animals and Cohabiting Humans. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2019, 57, e01537-18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Mughini-Gras, L.; Dorado-García, A.; van Duijkeren, E.; van den Bunt, G.; Dierikx, C.M.; Bonten, M.J.M.; Bootsma, M.C.J.; Schmitt, H.; Hald, T.; Evers, E.G.; et al. Attributable Sources of Community-Acquired Carriage of Escherichia coli Containing β-Lactam Antibiotic Resistance Genes: A Population-Based Modelling Study. Lancet Planet. Health 2019, 3, e357–e369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Toombs-Ruane, L.J.; Benschop, J.; French, N.P.; Biggs, P.J.; Midwinter, A.C.; Marshall, J.C.; Chan, M.; Drinković, D.; Fayaz, A.; Baker, M.G.; et al. Carriage of Extended-Spectrum-Beta-Lactamase- and AmpC Beta-Lactamase-Producing Escherichia coli Strains from Humans and Pets in the Same Households. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2020, 86, e01613-20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Schmitt, K.; Kuster, S.P.; Zurfluh, K.; Jud, R.S.; Sykes, J.E.; Stephan, R.; Willi, B. Transmission Chains of Extended-Spectrum Beta-Lactamase-Producing Enterobacteriaceae at the Companion Animal Veterinary Clinic–Household Interface. Antibiotics 2021, 10, 171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Platell, J.L.; Trott, D.J.; Johnson, J.R.; Heisig, P.; Heisig, A.; Clabots, C.R.; Johnston, B.; Cobbold, R.N. Prominence of an O75 Clonal Group (Clonal Complex 14) among Non-ST131 Fluoroquinolone-Resistant Escherichia coli Causing Extraintestinal Infections in Humans and Dogs in Australia. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2012, 56, 3898–3904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Marques, C.; Belas, A.; Aboim, C.; Trigueiro, G.; Cavaco-Silva, P.; Gama, L.T.; Pomba, C. Clonal Relatedness of Proteus Mirabilis Strains Causing Urinary Tract Infections in Companion Animals and Humans. Vet. Microbiol. 2019, 228, 77–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Brilhante, M.; Menezes, J.; Belas, A.; Feudi, C.; Schwarz, S.; Pomba, C.; Perreten, V. OXA-181-Producing Extraintestinal Pathogenic Escherichia coli Sequence Type 410 Isolated from a Dog in Portugal. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2020, 64, e02298-19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Perestrelo, S.; Correia Carreira, G.; Valentin, L.; Fischer, J.; Pfeifer, Y.; Werner, G.; Schmiedel, J.; Falgenhauer, L.; Imirzalioglu, C.; Chakraborty, T.; et al. Comparison of Approaches for Source Attribution of ESBL-Producing Escherichia coli in Germany. PLoS ONE 2022, 17, e0271317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Johnson, J.R.; Stell, A.L.; Delavari, P. Canine Feces as a Reservoir of Extraintestinal Pathogenic Escherichia Coli. Infect. Immun. 2001, 69, 1306–1314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Damborg, P.; Morsing, M.K.; Petersen, T.; Bortolaia, V.; Guardabassi, L. CTX-M-1 and CTX-M-15-Producing Escherichia coli in Dog Faeces from Public Gardens. Acta Vet. Scand. 2015, 57, 83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Ortega-Paredes, D.; Haro, M.; Leoro-Garzón, P.; Barba, P.; Loaiza, K.; Mora, F.; Fors, M.; Vinueza-Burgos, C.; Fernández-Moreira, E. Multidrug-Resistant Escherichia coli Isolated from Canine Faeces in a Public Park in Quito, Ecuador. J. Glob. Antimicrob. Resist. 2019, 18, 263–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Salinas, L.; Loayza, F.; Cárdenas, P.; Saraiva, C.; Johnson, T.J.; Amato, H.; Graham, J.P.; Trueba, G. Environmental Spread of Extended Spectrum Beta-Lactamase (ESBL) Producing Escherichia Coli and ESBL Genes among Children and Domestic Animals in Ecuador. Environ. Health Perspect. 2021, 129, 027007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Omulo, S.; Lofgren, E.T.; Lockwood, S.; Thumbi, S.M.; Bigogo, G.; Ouma, A.; Verani, J.R.; Juma, B.; Njenga, M.K.; Kariuki, S.; et al. Carriage of Antimicrobial-Resistant Bacteria in a High-Density Informal Settlement in Kenya Is Associated with Environmental Risk-Factors. Antimicrob. Resist. Infect. Control 2021, 10, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. INE. Estatísticas das Famílias e Condições de Vida: Inquérito Multi-Objetivo Contínuo 2019; Instituto Nacional de Estatística: Praia, Cabo Verde, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  33. Lopes Antunes, A.C.; Ducheyne, E.; Bryssinckx, W.; Vieira, S.; Malta, M.; Vaz, Y.; Nunes, T.; Mintiens, K. The Dog and Cat Population on Maio Island, Cape Verde: Characterisation and Prediction Based on Household Survey and Remotely Sensed Imagery. Geospat Health 2015, 10, 386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Tiwari, H.K.; Robertson, I.D.; O’Dea, M.; Vanak, A.T. Demographic Characteristics of Free-Roaming Dogs (FRD) in Rural and Urban India Following a Photographic Sight-Resight Survey. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 16562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  35. Skandalis, N.; Maeusli, M.; Papafotis, D.; Miller, S.; Lee, B.; Theologidis, I.; Luna, B. Environmental Spread of Antibiotic Resistance. Antibiotics 2021, 10, 640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Magiorakos, A.-P.; Srinivasan, A.; Carey, R.B.; Carmeli, Y.; Falagas, M.E.; Giske, C.G.; Harbarth, S.; Hindler, J.F.; Kahlmeter, G.; Olsson-Liljequist, B.; 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, 268–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Ogeer-Gyles, J.; Mathews, K.A.; Sears, W.; Prescott, J.F.; Weese, J.S.; Boerlin, P. Development of Antimicrobial Drug Resistance in Rectal Escherichia coli Isolates from Dogs Hospitalized in an Intensive Care Unit. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 2006, 229, 694–699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Marks, S.L.; Rankin, S.C.; Byrne, B.A.; Weese, J.S. Enteropathogenic Bacteria in Dogs and Cats: Diagnosis, Epidemiology, Treatment, and Control. J. Vet. Intern. Med. 2011, 25, 1195–1208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Oliveira, M.; Monteiro, J.L.; Rana, S.; Vilela, C.L. Antimicrobial Resistance in Gram-Positive Bacteria from Timorese River Buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) Skin Microbiota. Trop. Anim. Health Prod. 2010, 42, 833–839. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Gibb, A.P.; Crichton, M. Cefpodoxime Screening of Escherichia coli and Klebsiella spp. by Vitek for Detection of Organisms Producing Extended-Spectrum ␤-Lactamases. Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2000, 3, 255–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Färber, J.; Moder, K.-A.; Layer, F.; Tammer, I.; König, W.; König, B. Extended-Spectrum Beta-Lactamase Detection with Different Panels for Automated Susceptibility Testing and with a Chromogenic Medium. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2008, 46, 3721–3727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Girlich, D.; Bouihat, N.; Poirel, L.; Benouda, A.; Nordmann, P. High Rate of Faecal Carriage of Extended-Spectrum β-Lactamase and OXA-48 Carbapenemase-Producing Enterobacteriaceae at a University Hospital in Morocco. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2014, 20, 350–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. CLSI. Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing, Twenty-Third Informational Supplement; Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute: Wayne, PA, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  44. Jarlier, V.; Nicolas, M.-H.; Fournier, G.; Philippon, A. Extended Broad-Spectrum -Lactamases Conferring Transferable Resistance to Newer -Lactam Agents in Enterobacteriaceae: Hospital Prevalence and Susceptibility Patterns. Clin. Infect. Dis. 1988, 10, 867–878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Drieux, L.; Brossier, F.; Sougakoff, W.; Jarlier, V. Phenotypic Detection of Extended-Spectrum β-Lactamase Production in Enterobacteriaceae: Review and Bench Guide. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2008, 14, 90–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  46. Kaur, J.; Chopra, S.; Sheevani; Mahajan, G. Modified Double Disc Synergy Test to Detect ESBL Production in Urinary Isolates of Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae. J. Clin. Diagn. Res. 2013, 7, 229–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. EUCAST. EUCAST Guidelines for Detection of Resistance Mechanisms and Specific Resistances of Clinical and/or Epidemiological Importance Version 2.0; European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing: Stockholm, Sweden, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  48. Hordijk, J.; Schoormans, A.; Kwakernaak, M.; Duim, B.; Broens, E.; Dierikx, C.; Mevius, D.; Wagenaar, J.A. High Prevalence of Fecal Carriage of Extended Spectrum β-Lactamase/AmpC-Producing Enterobacteriaceae in Cats and Dogs. Front. Microbiol. 2013, 4, 242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Abdel-Moein, K.A.; Samir, A. Occurrence of Extended Spectrum β–Lactamase-Producing Enterobacteriaceae among Pet Dogs and Cats: An Emerging Public Health Threat Outside Health Care Facilities. Am. J. Infect. Control 2014, 42, 796–798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Coque, T.M.; Baquero, F.; Cantón, R. Increasing Prevalence of ESBL-Producing Enterobacteriaceae in Europe. Eurosurveillance 2008, 13, 19044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Punia, M.; Kumar, A.; Charaya, G.; Kumar, T. Pathogens Isolated from Clinical Cases of Urinary Tract Infection in Dogs and Their Antibiogram. Vet. World 2018, 1037–1042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  52. Brady, C.A.; Otto, C.M. Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome, Sepsis, and Multiple Organ Dysfunction. Vet. Clin. North Am. Small Anim. Pract. 2001, 31, 1147–1162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Keynan, Y.; Rubinstein, E. The Changing Face of Klebsiella pneumoniae Infections in the Community. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 2007, 30, 385–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Milo, S.; Heylen, R.A.; Glancy, J.; Williams, G.T.; Patenall, B.L.; Hathaway, H.J.; Thet, N.T.; Allinson, S.L.; Laabei, M.; Jenkins, A.T.A. A Small-Molecular Inhibitor against Proteus mirabilis Urease to Treat Catheter-Associated Urinary Tract Infections. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 3726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Kapoor, G.; Saigal, S.; Elongavan, A. Action and Resistance Mechanisms of Antibiotics: A Guide for Clinicians. J. Anaesthesiol. Clin. Pharm. 2017, 33, 300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Romo-Ibáñez, Á.; Calatrava-Hernández, E.; Gutiérrez-Soto, B.; Pérez-Ruiz, M.; Navarro-Marí, J.M.; Gutiérrez-Fernández, J. High Clinical Impact of Rapid Susceptibility Testing on CHROMID ESBL® Medium Directly from Swabs. Ann. Transl. Med. 2020, 8, 604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. CLSI. Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Disk and Dilution Susceptibility Tests for Bacteria Isolated from Animals, 5th ed.; Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute: Wayne, PA, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  58. Parajuli, N.P.; Maharjan, P.; Parajuli, H.; Joshi, G.; Paudel, D.; Sayami, S.; Khanal, P.R. High Rates of Multidrug Resistance among Uropathogenic Escherichia coli in Children and Analyses of ESBL Producers from Nepal. Antimicrob. Resist. Infect. Control 2017, 6, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  59. Marques, C.; Belas, A.; Franco, A.; Aboim, C.; Gama, L.T.; Pomba, C. Increase in Antimicrobial Resistance and Emergence of Major International High-Risk Clonal Lineages in Dogs and Cats with Urinary Tract Infection: 16 Year Retrospective Study. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2018, 73, 377–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  60. Kantele, A.; Mero, S.; Kirveskari, J.; Lääveri, T. Fluoroquinolone Antibiotic Users Select Fluoroquinolone-Resistant ESBL-Producing Enterobacteriaceae (ESBL-PE)—Data of a Prospective Traveller Study. Travel Med. Infect. Dis. 2017, 16, 23–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  61. Johansson, V.; Nykäsenoja, S.; Myllyniemi, A.-L.; Rossow, H.; Heikinheimo, A. Genomic Characterization of ESBL/AmpC-Producing and High-Risk Clonal Lineages of Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae in Imported Dogs with Shelter and Stray Background. J. Glob. Antimicrob. Resist. 2022, 30, 183–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Götsch, S.; Leschnik, M.; Duscher, G.; Burgstaller, J.P.; Wille-Piazzai, W.; Joachim, A. Ticks and Haemoparasites of Dogs from Praia, Cape Verde. Vet. Parasitol. 2009, 166, 171–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Leshem, E.; Meltzer, E.; Schwartz, E. Travel-Associated Zoonotic Bacterial Diseases. Curr. Opin. Infect. Dis. 2011, 24, 457–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Taheri, A.R.; Rad, S.S.; Molkara, S. Systemic Treatments of Leishmaniasis: A Narrative Review. Rev. Clin. Med. 2019, 6, 91–97. [Google Scholar]
  65. Onduru, O.G.; Aboud, S.; Nyirenda, T.S.; Rumisha, S.F.; Mkakosya, R.S. Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing Profiles of ESBL-Producing Enterobacterales Isolated from Hospital and Community Adult Patients in Blantyre, Malawi. IJID Reg. 2021, 1, 47–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Ortiz-Díez, G.; Mengíbar, R.L.; Turrientes, M.-C.; Artigao, M.-R.B.; Gallifa, R.L.; Tello, A.M.; Pérez, C.F.; Santiago, T.A. Prevalence, Incidence and Risk Factors for Acquisition and Colonization of Extended-Spectrum Beta-Lactamase- and Carbapenemase-Producing Enterobacteriaceae from Dogs Attended at a Veterinary Hospital in Spain. Comp. Immunol. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2023, 92, 101922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Karlowsky, J.A.; Thornsberry, C.; Jones, M.E.; Sahm, D.F. Susceptibility of Antimicrobial-Resistant Urinary Escherichia coli Isolates to Fluoroquinolones and Nitrofurantoin. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2003, 36, 183–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  68. Raja, N.S. Oral Treatment Options for Patients with Urinary Tract Infections Caused by Extended Spectrum Βeta-Lactamase (ESBL) Producing Enterobacteriaceae. J. Infect. Public Health 2019, 12, 843–846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. McKinnell, J.A.; Stollenwerk, N.S.; Jung, C.W.; Miller, L.G. Nitrofurantoin Compares Favorably to Recommended Agents as Empirical Treatment of Uncomplicated Urinary Tract Infections in a Decision and Cost Analysis. Mayo Clin. Proc. 2011, 86, 480–488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  70. Leuin, A.S.; Hartmann, F.; Viviano, K. Administration of Nitrofurantoin in Dogs with Lower Urinary Tract Infections: 14 Cases (2013–2019). J. Small Anim. Pr. 2021, 62, 42–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. Huycke, M.M.; Spiegel, C.A.; Gilmore, M.S. Bacteremia Caused by Hemolytic, High-Level Gentamicin-Resistant Enterococcus faecalis. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 1991, 35, 1626–1634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  72. Leener, E.D.; Decostere, A.; De Graef, E.M.; Moyaert, H.; Haesebrouck, F. Presence and Mechanism of Antimicrobial Resistance among Enterococci from Cats and Dogs. Microb. Drug Resist. 2005, 11, 395–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Dadfarma, N.; Imani Fooladi, A.A.; Oskoui, M.; Mahmoodzadeh Hosseini, H. High Level of Gentamicin Resistance (HLGR) among Enterococcus Strains Isolated from Clinical Specimens. J. Infect. Public Health 2013, 6, 202–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  74. Aslanta, Ö. Investigation of Faecal Carriage of High-Level Gentamicin Resistant Enterococci in Dogs and Cats. Isr. J. Vet. Med. 2022, 77, 27–37. [Google Scholar]
  75. Magwenzi, M.T.; Gudza-Mugabe, M.; Mujuru, H.A.; Dangarembizi-Bwakura, M.; Robertson, V.; Aiken, A.M. Carriage of Antibiotic-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae in Hospitalised Children in Tertiary Hospitals in Harare, Zimbabwe. Antimicrob. Resist. Infect. Control 2017, 6, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  76. Maeyama, Y.; Taniguchi, Y.; Hayashi, W.; Ohsaki, Y.; Osaka, S.; Koide, S.; Tamai, K.; Nagano, Y.; Arakawa, Y.; Nagano, N. Prevalence of ESBL/AmpC Genes and Specific Clones among the Third-Generation Cephalosporin-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae from Canine and Feline Clinical Specimens in Japan. Vet. Microbiol. 2018, 216, 183–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  77. Nordmann, P.; Dortet, L.; Poirel, L. Carbapenem Resistance in Enterobacteriaceae: Here Is the Storm! Trends Mol. Med. 2012, 18, 263–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. van Duin, D.; Kaye, K.S.; Neuner, E.A.; Bonomo, R.A. Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae: A Review of Treatment and Outcomes. Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2013, 75, 115–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  79. Kelly, A.M.; Mathema, B.; Larson, E.L. Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae in the Community: A Scoping Review. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 2017, 50, 127–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Cole, S.D.; Peak, L.; Tyson, G.H.; Reimschuessel, R.; Ceric, O.; Rankin, S.C. New Delhi Metallo-β-Lactamase-5–Producing Escherichia coli in Companion Animals, United States. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2020, 26, 381–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  81. Bandyopadhyay, S. Companion Animals Emerged as an Important Reservoir of Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae: A Report from India. Curr. Microbiol. 2021, 78, 1006–1016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Wilson, J.W. Mechanisms of Bacterial Pathogenicity. Postgrad. Med. J. 2002, 78, 216–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  83. Hoyle, B.D.; Costerton, J.W. Bacterial Resistance to Antibiotics: The Role of Biofilms. In Progress in Drug Research/Fortschritte der Arzneimittelforschung/Progrès des Recherches Pharmaceutiques; Jucker, E., Ed.; Birkhäuser: Basel, Switzerland, 1991; pp. 91–105. ISBN 978-3-7643-2626-5. [Google Scholar]
  84. Johnson, D.I. Bacterial Pathogens and Their Virulence Factors; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; ISBN 978-3-319-67650-0. [Google Scholar]
  85. Mah, T.-F.; Pitts, B.; Pellock, B.; Walker, G.C.; Stewart, P.S.; O’Toole, G.A. A genetic basis for Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilm antibiotic resistance. Nature 2003, 426, 306–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Høiby, N.; Bjarnsholt, T.; Givskov, M.; Molin, S.; Ciofu, O. Antibiotic Resistance of Bacterial Biofilms. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 2010, 35, 322–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  87. De Jesus, M.B.; Ehlers, M.M.; Dos Santos, R.F.; Kock, M.M. Review—Understanding β-Lactamase Producing Klebsiella Pneumoniae. In Antimicrobial Resistance—An Open Challenge; Ossiprandi, M.C., Ed.; InTech: Nappanee, Indiana, 2015; ISBN 978-953-51-2222-7. [Google Scholar]
  88. Cinquepalmi, V.; Monno, R.; Fumarola, L.; Ventrella, G.; Calia, C.; Greco, M.; de Vito, D.; Soleo, L. Environmental Contamination by Dog’s Faeces: A Public Health Problem? Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2012, 10, 72–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  89. Damborg, P.; Broens, E.M.; Chomel, B.B.; Guenther, S.; Pasmans, F.; Wagenaar, J.A.; Weese, J.S.; Wieler, L.H.; Windahl, U.; Vanrompay, D.; et al. Bacterial Zoonoses Transmitted by Household Pets: State-of-the-Art and Future Perspectives for Targeted Research and Policy Actions. J. Comp. Pathol. 2016, 155, S27–S40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  90. Low, D.A.; Braaten, B.A.; Ling, G.V.; Johnson, D.L.; Ruby, A.L. Isolation and Comparison of Escherichia Coli Strains from Canine and Human Patients with Urinary Tract Infections. Infect. Immun. 1988, 56, 2601–2609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  91. Wedley, A.L.; Dawson, S.; Maddox, T.W.; Coyne, K.P.; Pinchbeck, G.L.; Clegg, P.; Nuttall, T.; Kirchner, M.; Williams, N.J. Carriage of Antimicrobial Resistant Escherichia coli in Dogs: Prevalence, Associated Risk Factors and Molecular Characteristics. Vet. Microbiol. 2017, 199, 23–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  92. van den Bunt, G.; Fluit, A.C.; Spaninks, M.P.; Timmerman, A.J.; Geurts, Y.; Kant, A.; Scharringa, J.; Mevius, D.; Wagenaar, J.A.; Bonten, M.J.M.; et al. Faecal Carriage, Risk Factors, Acquisition and Persistence of ESBL-Producing Enterobacteriaceae in Dogs and Cats and Co-Carriage with Humans Belonging to the Same Household. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2020, 75, 342–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. INE. V Recenseamento Geral da População e Habitação (RGPH 2021): Resultados Preliminares; Instituto Nacional de Estatística: Praia, Cape Verde, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  94. ONU-Habitat. Perfil Urbano da Cidade da Praia Ilha de Santiago República de Cabo Verde; Programa das Nações Unidas para os Assentamentos Humanos: Nairobi, Kenya, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  95. Eisenstein, M. The Growth of Slums in the Developing World’s Rapidly Expanding Cities Is Creating New Opportunities for Infectious Disease to Flourish and Spread; Nature Publishing Group: Berlin, Germany, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  96. Tal, S.; Tikhonov, E.; Aroch, I.; Hefetz, L.; Turjeman, S.; Koren, O.; Kuzi, S. Developmental Intestinal Microbiome Alterations in Canine Fading Puppy Syndrome: A Prospective Observational Study. NPJ Biofilms Microbiomes 2021, 7, 52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Fernandes, M.; Nóbrega Carneiro, C.; Villada Rosales, A.M.; Grilo, M.; Ramiro, Y.; Cunha, E.; Nunes, T.; Tavares, L.; Sandi, J.; Oliveira, M. Antimicrobial Resistance and Virulence Profiles of Enterobacterales Isolated from Two-Finger and Three-Finger Sloths (Choloepus hoffmanni and Bradypus variegatus) of Costa Rica. PeerJ 2022, 10, e12911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  98. Cardoso, M.; Prata, I.; Rebelo, I.; Nunes, T.; Pires, A.; Carneiro, C.; Bexiga, R. Antimicrobial (ESBL) Resistance Genes in Faecal E. Coli of Calves Fed Waste Milk with Antimicrobial Residues. J. Dairy Res. 2022, 89, 259–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  99. Fernandes, M.; Grilo, M.L.; Carneiro, C.; Cunha, E.; Tavares, L.; Patino-Martinez, J.; Oliveira, M. Antibiotic Resistance and Virulence Profiles of Gram-Negative Bacteria Isolated from Loggerhead Sea Turtles (Caretta caretta) of the Island of Maio, Cape Verde. Antibiotics 2021, 10, 771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  100. Grilo, M.L.; Pereira, A.; Sousa-Santos, C.; Robalo, J.I.; Oliveira, M. Climatic Alterations Influence Bacterial Growth, Biofilm Production and Antimicrobial Resistance Profiles in Aeromonas spp. Antibiotics 2021, 10, 1008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Antibiotics 12 00447 g001 550
Figure 1. Map of Cape Verde and study area. The municipality of Praia is marked with a black circle, and Bons Amigos Association (Bons Amigos) with a red pin. The municipality of Boa Vista is marked with a grey circle, and Nerina Association (Nerina) with a red pin. The map was adapted from Vemaps© (vemaps.com) and Google Maps (maps.google.com).
Figure 1. Map of Cape Verde and study area. The municipality of Praia is marked with a black circle, and Bons Amigos Association (Bons Amigos) with a red pin. The municipality of Boa Vista is marked with a grey circle, and Nerina Association (Nerina) with a red pin. The map was adapted from Vemaps© (vemaps.com) and Google Maps (maps.google.com).
Antibiotics 12 00447 g001
Table
Table 1. Sampled animals’ data by sampling location.
Table 1. Sampled animals’ data by sampling location.
Spay/Neuter StatusPresence of External ParasitesBody Condition Score
YESNOYESNO12345
BA
(n = 50)		n = 0n = 50
(100%)		n = 46
(92%)		n = 4
(8%)		n = 6
(12%)		n = 22
(44%)		n = 20
(40%)		n = 2
(4%)		n = 0
Ne
(n = 50)		n = 35
(70%)		n = 15
(30%)		n = 12
(24%)		n = 38
(76%)		n = 1
(2%)		n = 12
(24%)		n = 34
(68%)		n = 3
(6%)		n = 0
Bons Amigos Association (BA); Nerina Association (Ne); number of isolates (n = x); percentage (%).
Table
Table 2. Antimicrobial susceptibility profile of the isolates under study, regarding eleven antimicrobials belonging to five different classes.
Table 2. Antimicrobial susceptibility profile of the isolates under study, regarding eleven antimicrobials belonging to five different classes.
Antimicrobial ClassAntimicrobial CompoundConcentration
(µg)		Bacterial Isolates
(n = x (%))
SIR
β-lactamsAMP100048 (100)
CTX3001 (2)47 (98)
CPT3003 (6)45 (94)
AMC3024 (50)9 (19)15 (31)
MEM1048 (100)00
FluroquinolonesCIP526 (54)9 (19)13 (27)
ENR510 (21)13 (27)25 (52)
TetracyclinesDO3018 (38)4 (8)26 (54)
AminoglycosidesCN1029 (60)1 (2)18 (38)
CN12048 (100)00
NitrofuransF10041 (85)07 (15)
Number of isolates (n = x); percentage (%); susceptible (S); intermediate (I); resistant (R); cefotaxime (CTX); ceftaroline (CPT); ampicillin (AMP); amoxicillin/clavulanate (AMC); gentamicin (CN); doxycycline (DO); enrofloxacin (ENR); ciprofloxacin (CIP); nitrofurantoin (F); meropenem (MEM). Note 1: K. pneumoniae, E. cloacae, C. freundii, and M. morganii have intrinsic resistance to ampicillin (AMP). Note 2: E. cloacae, C. freundii, and M. morganii have intrinsic resistance to amoxicillin/clavulanate (AMC). Note 3: P. mirabilis and M. morganii have intrinsic resistance to doxycycline (DO). Note 4: P. mirabilis and M. morganii have intrinsic resistance to nitrofurantoin (F).
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Matos, A.; Cunha, E.; Baptista, L.; Tavares, L.; Oliveira, M. ESBL-Positive Enterobacteriaceae from Dogs of Santiago and Boa Vista Islands, Cape Verde: A Public Health Concern. Antibiotics 2023, 12, 447. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics12030447

AMA Style

Matos A, Cunha E, Baptista L, Tavares L, Oliveira M. ESBL-Positive Enterobacteriaceae from Dogs of Santiago and Boa Vista Islands, Cape Verde: A Public Health Concern. Antibiotics. 2023; 12(3):447. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics12030447

Chicago/Turabian Style

Matos, Alice, Eva Cunha, Lara Baptista, Luís Tavares, and Manuela Oliveira. 2023. "ESBL-Positive Enterobacteriaceae from Dogs of Santiago and Boa Vista Islands, Cape Verde: A Public Health Concern" Antibiotics 12, no. 3: 447. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics12030447

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop