Genomic pitfalls in hospital surveillance: unexpected Enterobacter cloacae clustering without epidemiological link highlights the need for cautious core genome MLST analysis interpretation
Rattachement africain : fr. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Whole-genome sequencing has become a key tool for identifying bacterial cross-transmission in healthcare settings. Among the methods used, core-genome Multi-Locus Sequence Typing (cgMLST) is considered as the reference method owing to its standardization. However, its limitations are often overlooked, particularly for taxonomically complex species such as Enterobacter cloacae. We report a case of false-positive genomic linkage between two E. cloacae isolates recovered from patients hospitalized in different units, four months apart, with no epidemiological overlap. Routine retrospective genomic surveillance using a local cgMLST scheme flagged these isolates as genetically related. However, further analyses based on core-genome Single-Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNPs) calling and molecular phylogeny, including public genomes, revealed that the two isolates belonged to distinct clusters and differed by 99 SNPs. This case illustrates the risk of overinterpreting cgMLST results when applied to species with high genomic heterogeneity and insufficiently robust schemes. These findings highlight the importance of interpreting genomic data within its epidemiological context, and in the case of inconsistency confirming potential links through high-resolution SNP analysis, and developing standardized, species-specific cgMLST schemes.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Genomic pitfalls in hospital surveillance: unexpected Enterobacter cloacae clustering without epidemiological link highlights the need for cautious core genome MLST analysis interpretation
- Date Crossref
- 28/12/2025
- Éditeur
- Springer Science and Business Media LLC
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.