A Seven-Year Study of Carbapenem-Resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae Bloodstream Infections in a Tertiary Hospital in Greece: A Shift Toward Metallo-β-Lactamase and Dual-Carbapenemase Strains

Le résumé fourni par la source

Background: Carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae (CRKp) remains a critical driver of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in hospital settings worldwide. Methods: This study examined trends in CRKp bloodstream infections over a seven-year period (2019–2025) in a tertiary care hospital in Greece, with particular attention to resistance patterns and patient outcomes, including the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: A total of 671 non-duplicate CRKp isolates were analyzed and classified into three groups: KPC producers (67.4%), dual carbapenemase producers (17.4%), and single metallo-β-lactamase (MBL) producers (15.2%). Overall incidence showed a slight but non-significant increase over time. KPC-producing strains rose significantly until 2022 (p<0.001), followed by a marked decline (p<0.001). In contrast, dual carbapenemase producers—mainly KPC combined with VIM or NDM—and single-MBL producers, particularly NDM, increased steadily, indicating a notable epidemiological shift. Resistance to aminoglycosides and tigecycline increased around 2021, followed by partial declines, whereas colistin resistance demonstrated a continuous upward trend throughout the study period. Despite phenotypic differences, overall mortality remained high, with no statistically significant differences between groups (p = 0.37), likely reflecting either the severity of patients’ clinical condition or inadequate empirical antibiotic therapy. Conclusions: This study highlights a dynamic evolution in CRKp epidemiology with decreasing KPC dominance and increasing prevalence of MBL- and dual carbapenemase- producing strains. This transition, which became evident during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, underscores ongoing epidemiological adaptation and the urgent need for improved antimicrobial stewardship, rapid diagnostics, and broader access to effective therapies.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.