Research Progress in Heteroresistance of Escherichia coli

doi:10.13560/j.cnki.biotech.bull.1985.2022-0854

Abstract

Abstract:

Escherichia coli is a commonly pathogen in humans and animals,which has developed resistance to a variety of antibiotics. Due to the increasing selection pressure of antibiotics,the E. coli strains are more adaptable and pathogenic,the spread of antimicrobial resistance is faster,and the colonization rate is higher,that poses great challenges to epidemiology and clinical treatment. In recent years,researches related to heteroresistance（HR）of E. coli have been reported. HR refers to the fact that the homologous subpopulations in bacteria show different susceptibility to a certain antibiotic,which is the intermediate stage of sensitive bacteria evolving into drug-resistant bacteria. Different from full resistance,it is difficult for HR to be detected clinically in time,which often leads to the failure of clinical therapy. Therefore,in order to effectively prevent and control E. coli infection and the evolution of antimicrobial resistance,it is particularly important to deeply analyze the epidemiological characteristics and possible mechanisms of E. coli's HR. This paper sorts the studies on HR,and reviews the phenotypic characteristics,detection methods and possible mechanisms of HR. It is aimed to strengthen the understanding and research on the HR of E.coli,and to provide a comprehensive understanding of E. coli antimicrobial resistance process and mechanism,optimizing antibiotics use strategies,and slowing down the emergence of resistant strains.

Key words: Escherichia coli, antibiotics, heteroresistance, mechanism

ZHAO Yan-kun, LIU Hui-min, MENG Lu, WANG Cheng, WANG Jia-qi, ZHENG Nan. Research Progress in Heteroresistance of Escherichia coli[J]. Biotechnology Bulletin, 2022, 38(9): 59-71.

Figures/Tables 7

References 59

[1]	全国细菌耐药监测网, 2020年全国细菌耐药监测报告[EB/OL]. 2020.
	National Bacterial Resistance Monitoring Network, Henan Agricultural University, 2020 National Bacterial Resistance Monitoring report[EB/OL]. 2020.
[2]	Andersson DI, Nicoloff H, Hjort K. Mechanisms and clinical relevance of bacterial heteroresistance[J]. Nat Rev Microbiol, 2019, 17(8):479-496. doi: 10.1038/s41579-019-0218-1 pmid: 31235888
[3]	Charretier Y, Diene SM, Baud D, et al. Colistin heteroresistance and involvement of the PmrAB regulatory system in Acinetobacter baumannii[J]. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 2018, 62(9):e00788-e00718.
[4]	Altrichter T, Heizmann WR. Gardnerella vaginalis:transport, microscopy, testing resistance[J]. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd, 1994, 54(11):606-611. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-1022350 URL
[5]	Alexander HE, Leidy G. Mode of action of streptomycin on type b Hemophilus influenzae:ii. nature of resistant variants[J]. J Exp Med, 1947, 85(6):607-621. doi: 10.1084/jem.85.6.607 pmid: 19871639
[6]	Hiramatsu K, Hanaki H, Ino T, et al. Methicillin-resistant Staphylo-coccus aureus clinical strain with reduced vancomycin susceptibility[J]. J Antimicrob Chemother, 1997, 40(1):135-136. doi: 10.1093/jac/40.1.135 URL
[7]	El-Halfawy OM, Valvano MA. Antimicrobial heteroresistance:an emerging field in need of clarity[J]. Clin Microbiol Rev, 2015, 28(1):191-207. doi: 10.1128/CMR.00058-14 pmid: 25567227
[8]	Li PY, Huang Y, Yu L, et al. Isolation and whole-genome sequence analysis of the imipenem heteroresistant Acinetobacter baumannii clinical isolate HRAB-85[J]. Int J Infect Dis, 2017, 62:94-101. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2017.07.005 URL
[9]	Dewachter L, Fauvart M, Michiels J. Bacterial heterogeneity and antibiotic survival:understanding and combatting persistence and heteroresistance[J]. Mol Cell, 2019, 76(2):255-267. doi: S1097-2765(19)30733-6 pmid: 31626749
[10]	Stojowska-Swędrzyńska K, Łupkowska A, Kuczyńska-Wiśnik D, et al. Antibiotic heteroresistance in Klebsiella pneumoniae[J]. Int J Mol Sci, 2021, 23(1):449. doi: 10.3390/ijms23010449 URL
[11]	Nicoloff H, Hjort K, et al. The high prevalence of antibiotic heteroresistance in pathogenic bacteria is mainly caused by gene amplification[J]. Nat Microbiol, 2019, 4(3):504-514. doi: 10.1038/s41564-018-0342-0 pmid: 30742072
[12]	van Hal SJ, Wehrhahn MC, Barbagiannakos T, et al. Performance of various testing methodologies for detection of heteroresistant vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus in bloodstream isolates[J]. J Clin Microbiol, 2011, 49(4):1489-1494. doi: 10.1128/JCM.02302-10 URL
[13]	Norazah A, Law NL, Kamel AGM, et al. The presence of heterogeneous vancomycin-lntermediate Staphylococcus aureus(heteroVISA)in a major Malaysian hospital[J]. Med J Malaysia, 2012, 67(3):269-273.
[14]	Lo-Ten-Foe JR, de Smet AMGA, Diederen BMW, et al. Comparative evaluation of the VITEK 2, disk diffusion, etest, broth microdilution, and agar dilution susceptibility testing methods for colistin in clinical isolates, including heteroresistant Enterobacter cloacae and Acinetobacter baumannii strains[J]. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 2007, 51(10):3726-3730. pmid: 17646414
[15]	Leonard SN, Rossi KL, Newton KL, et al. Evaluation of the Etest GRD for the detection of Staphylococcus aureus with reduced susceptibility to glycopeptides[J]. J Antimicrob Chemother, 2009, 63(3):489-492. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkn520 pmid: 19136530
[16]	Satola SW, Farley MM, et al. Comparison of detection methods for heteroresistant vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus, with the population analysis profile method as the reference method[J]. J Clin Microbiol, 2011, 49(1):177-183. doi: 10.1128/JCM.01128-10 pmid: 21048008
[17]	Silveira AC, Sambrano GE, Paim TG, et al. Is prediffusion test an alternative to improve accuracy in screening hVISA strains and to detect susceptibility to glycopeptides/lipopeptides?[J]. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis, 2014, 79(4):401-404. doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2014.04.008 URL
[18]	Wootton M, Howe RA, Hillman R, et al. A modified population analysis profile(PAP)method to detect hetero-resistance to vancomycin in Staphylococcus aureus in a UK hospital[J]. J Antimicrob Chemother, 2001, 47(4):399-403. doi: 10.1093/jac/47.4.399 URL
[19]	Chakravorty S, Simmons AM, Rowneki M, et al. The new xpert MTB/RIF ultra:improving detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis and resistance to rifampin in an assay suitable for point-of-care testing[J]. mBio, 2017, 8(4):e00812-e00817.
[20]	Sun L, Talarico S, Yao LN, et al. Droplet digital PCR-based detection of clarithromycin resistance in Helicobacter pylori isolates reveals frequent heteroresistance[J]. J Clin Microbiol, 2018, 56(9):e00019-e00018.
[21]	Operario DJ, Koeppel AF, Turner SD, et al. Prevalence and extent of heteroresistance by next generation sequencing of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis[J]. PLoS One, 2017, 12(5):e0176522. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0176522 URL
[22]	Tan KR, Nguyen J, Nguyen K, et al. Prevalence of the carbapenem-heteroresistant phenotype among ESBL-producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae clinical isolates[J]. J Antimicrob Chemother, 2020, 75(6):1506-1512.
[23]	Sun JD, Huang SF, Yang SS, et al. Impact of carbapenem heteroresistance among clinical isolates of invasive Escherichia coli in Chongqing, southwestern China[J]. Clin Microbiol Infect, 2015, 21(5):469. e1-469. 10.
[24]	汤丽霞, 韦莹慧, 等. 大肠埃希菌碳青霉烯异质性耐药的流行病学特征及影响因素分析[J]. 右江民族医学院学报, 2018, 40(2):172-176.
	Tang LX, Wei YH, et al. Epidemiological characteristics and influencing factors analysis of Carbapenems heteroresistant Escherichia coli[J]. J Youjiang Med Univ Natl, 2018, 40(2):172-176.
[25]	张文萍, 张秋萍, 崔海燕, 等. 大肠埃希菌碳青霉烯异质性耐药分析及流行病学调查[J]. 广东医学, 2018, 39(12):1830-1835.
	Zhang WP, Zhang QP, Cui HY, et al. Epidemiology and heterogeneous drug resistance of Escherichia coli[J]. Guangdong Med J, 2018, 39(12):1830-1835.
[26]	Baroud M, Dandache I, et al. Underlying mechanisms of carbapenem resistance in extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae and Escherichia coli isolates at a tertiary care centre in Lebanon:role of OXA-48 and NDM-1 carbapenemases[J]. Int J Antimicrob Agents, 2013, 41(1):75-79. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2012.08.010 URL
[27]	Zhang CM, Xu XY, Pu SL, et al. Characterization of carbapenemases, extended spectrum β-lactamases, quinolone resistance and aminoglycoside resistance determinants in carbapenem-non-susceptible Escherichia coli from a teaching hospital in Chongqing, Southwest China[J]. Infect Genet Evol, 2014, 27:271-276. doi: 10.1016/j.meegid.2014.07.031 URL
[28]	Juhász E, Iván M, Pintér E, et al. Colistin resistance among blood culture isolates at a tertiary care centre in Hungary[J]. J Glob Antimicrob Resist, 2017, 11:167-170. doi: S2213-7165(17)30147-9 pmid: 28838854
[29]	Liao WL, Lin J, Jia HY, et al. Resistance and heteroresistance to colistin in Escherichia coli isolates from Wenzhou, China[J]. Infect Drug Resist, 2020, 13:3551-3561. doi: 10.2147/IDR.S273784 URL
[30]	邝启红. 动物源大肠杆菌对黏菌素和头孢噻呋异质性耐药的特性研究[D]. 郑州: 河南农业大学, 2021.
	Kuang QH. The characteristics of heteroresistance to colistin and ceftiofur in Escherichia coli isolates from animals[D]. Zhengzhou: Henan Agricultural University, 2021.
[31]	El-Halfawy OM, Valvano MA. Chemical communication of antibiotic resistance by a highly resistant subpopulation of bacterial cells[J]. PLoS One, 2013, 8(7):e68874. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0068874 URL
[32]	Adler M, Anjum M, Andersson DI, et al. Influence of acquired β-lactamases on the evolution of spontaneous carbapenem resistance in Escherichia coli[J]. J Antimicrob Chemother, 2013, 68(1):51-59. doi: 10.1093/jac/dks368 URL
[33]	Walsh TR, Toleman MA, et al. Metallo-beta-lactamases:the quiet before the storm?[J]. Clin Microbiol Rev, 2005, 18(2):306-325. doi: 10.1128/CMR.18.2.306-325.2005 URL
[34]	He JC, Jia XJ, Yang SS, et al. Heteroresistance to carbapenems in invasive Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections[J]. Int J Antimicrob Agents, 2018, 51(3):413-421. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2017.10.014 URL
[35]	孙坤玲. 大肠埃希菌碳青霉烯异质性耐药分子机制研究及碳青霉烯酶表型检测方法评价[D]. 重庆: 重庆医科大学, 2017.
	Sun KL. Molecular mechanism of carbapenem heteroresistance among Escherichia coli and evaluation of six phenotypic methods for the identification of carbapenemases[D]. Chongqing: Chongqing Medical University, 2017.
[36]	代佳伶. 肺炎克雷伯菌和大肠埃希菌碳青霉烯异质性耐药及机制研究[D]. 重庆: 重庆医科大学, 2019.
	Dai JL. Study on the mechanism of cabapenem heteroresistance in Klebsiella pneumoniae and Escherichia coli[D]. Chongqing: Chongqing Medical University, 2019.
[37]	Thulin E, Sundqvist M, Andersson DI. Amdinocillin(Mecillinam)resistance mutations in clinical isolates and laboratory-selected mutants of Escherichia coli[J]. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 2015, 59(3):1718-1727. doi: 10.1128/AAC.04819-14 URL
[38]	Schechter LM, Creely DP, Garner CD, et al. Extensive gene amplification as a mechanism for piperacillin-tazobactam resistance in Escherichia coli[J]. mBio, 2018, 9(2):e00583-e00518.
[39]	Lee JY, Choi MJ, Choi HJ, et al. Preservation of acquired colistin resistance in gram-negative bacteria[J]. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 2015, 60(1):609-612. doi: 10.1128/AAC.01574-15 URL
[40]	Halaby T, Kucukkose E, Janssen AB, et al. Genomic characterization of colistin heteroresistance in Klebsiella pneumoniae during a nosocomial outbreak[J]. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 2016, 60(11):6837-6843. doi: 10.1128/AAC.01344-16 URL
[41]	Huang L, Feng Y, Zong ZY. Heterogeneous resistance to colistin in Enterobacter cloacae complex due to a new small transmembrane protein[J]. J Antimicrob Chemother, 2019, 74(9):2551-2558. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkz236 URL
[42]	Cannatelli A, Giani T, D'Andrea MM, et al. MgrB inactivation is a common mechanism of colistin resistance in KPC-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae of clinical origin[J]. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 2014, 58(10):5696-5703. doi: 10.1128/AAC.03110-14 pmid: 25022583
[43]	Kuang QH, He DD, Sun HR, et al. R 93 P substitution in the PmrB HAMP domain contributes to colistin heteroresistance in Escherichia coli isolates from swine[J]. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 2020, 64(11):e01509-e01520.
[44]	Sato T, Shiraishi T, Hiyama Y, et al. Contribution of novel amino acid alterations in PmrA or PmrB to colistin resistance in mcr-negative Escherichia coli clinical isolates, including major multidrug-resistant lineages O25b:H4-ST131-H 30Rx and Non-x[J]. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 2018, 62(9):e00864-e00818.
[45]	Liu YY, Wang Y, Walsh TR, et al. Emergence of plasmid-mediated colistin resistance mechanism MCR-1 in animals and human beings in China:a microbiological and molecular biological study[J]. Lancet Infect Dis, 2016, 16(2):161-168. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(15)00424-7 URL
[46]	Xavier BB, Lammens C, et al. Identification of a novel plasmid-mediated colistin-resistance gene, mcr-2, in Escherichia coli, Belgium, June 2016[J]. Euro Surveill, 2016, 21(27):30280.
[47]	Yin WJ, Li H, Shen YB, et al. Novel plasmid-mediated colistin resistance gene mcr-3 in Escherichia coli[J]. mBio, 2017, 8(3):e00543-e00517.
[48]	Lippa AM, Goulian M. Feedback inhibition in the PhoQ/PhoP signaling system by a membrane peptide[J]. PLoS Genet, 2009, 5(12):e1000788. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000788 URL
[49]	Rodríguez-Villodres Á, Ortiz de la Rosa JM, Álvarez-Marín R, et al. Heteroresistance to piperacillin-tazobactam in clinical isolates of Escherichia coli sequence type 131[J]. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 2017, 62(1):e01923-e01917.
[50]	Cohen SP, McMurry LM, Levy SB. marA locus causes decreased expression of OmpF porin in multiple-antibiotic-resistant(Mar)mutants of Escherichia coli[J]. J Bacteriol, 1988, 170(12):5416-5422. pmid: 2848006
[51]	刘宇阳, 蓝锴, 等. 耐碳青霉烯类大肠埃希菌对替加环素异质性耐药的机制[J]. 分子诊断与治疗杂志, 2021, 13(2):178-182.
	Liu YY, Lan K, et al. Mechanisms of tigecycline heteroresistance in carbapenem-resistant Escherichia coli[J]. J Mol Diagn Ther, 2021, 13(2):178-182.
[52]	Lucas AE, Ito R, Mustapha MM, et al. Frequency and mechanisms of spontaneous fosfomycin nonsusceptibility observed upon disk diffusion testing of Escherichia coli[J]. J Clin Microbiol, 2017, 56(1):e01368-e01317.
[53]	Campos A, Andrade NL, Couto N, et al. Characterization of fosfomycin heteroresistance among multidrug-resistant Escherichia coli isolates from hospitalized patients in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil[J]. J Glob Antimicrob Resist, 2020, 22:584-593. doi: 10.1016/j.jgar.2020.04.026 URL
[54]	Wang XR, Kang Y, Luo CX, et al. Heteroresistance at the single-cell level:adapting to antibiotic stress through a population-based strategy and growth-controlled interphenotypic coordination[J]. mBio, 2014, 5(1):e00942-e00913.
[55]	Lebeaux D, Ghigo JM, Beloin C. Biofilm-related infections:bridging the gap between clinical management and fundamental aspects of recalcitrance toward antibiotics[J]. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev, 2014, 78(3):510-543. doi: 10.1128/MMBR.00013-14 URL
[56]	Bisht K, Wakeman CA. Discovery and therapeutic targeting of differentiated biofilm subpopulations[J]. Front Microbiol, 2019, 10:1908. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.01908 pmid: 31507548
[57]	Naparstek L, Carmeli Y, Navon-Venezia S, et al. Biofilm formation and susceptibility to gentamicin and colistin of extremely drug-resistant KPC-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae[J]. J Antimicrob Chemother, 2014, 69(4):1027-1034. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkt487 pmid: 24408988
[58]	Serra DO, Richter AM, Klauck G, et al. Microanatomy at cellular resolution and spatial order of physiological differentiation in a bacterial biofilm[J]. mBio, 2013, 4(2):e00103-e00113.
[59]	Silva A, Sousa AM, et al. Heteroresistance to colistin in Klebsiella pneumoniae is triggered by small colony variants sub-populations within biofilms[J]. Pathog Dis, 2016, 74(5):ftw036. doi: 10.1093/femspd/ftw036 URL

方法 Methods	优点 Advantages	缺点 Disadvantages	参考文献 Reference
E-test法、K-B纸片扩散法 E-test and Kirby-Bauer test	（1）传统、经典的药敏试验方法; （2）可用于异质性耐药的初筛; （3）操作简便、成本较低、结果直观易判读。	（1）由于平板上的细胞密度低,不易检出低频率出现的耐药亚群; （2）可信度低,假阳性、假阴性检出率较高。	[14]
M-E-test法M-E-test method	（1）可用于异质性耐药的大规模筛选; （2）操作简单。	培养板上细胞密度越高,检测异质性耐药亚群的概率越高,但检测的准确率不稳定,易造成误判。	[11]
GRD E-test、琼脂筛选 GRD E-test and agar screen	（1）临床实验室常规使用的药敏试验方法; （2）用于观察某种程度的耐药性和异质性耐药性之间存在强烈相关性的简单筛选方法（hVISA）。	（1）无法检测异质性耐药; （2）缺乏有关亚群频率和MIC的信息。	[15-16]
微量肉汤稀释法 Broth microdilution（BMD）	临床实验室常规使用的药敏试验方法。	（1）在存在耐药亚群的情况下,MIC的读数高度依赖于耐药细菌的接种密度和生长速率; （2）没有关于耐药亚群频率的信息,其MIC信息较差; （3）操作繁琐。	[17]
琼脂稀释 Agar dilution	临床实验室常规使用的药敏试验方法。	（1）使用耐药细菌的单个小菌落有可能错过低频率的亚群; （2）如果检测到异质性耐药,则提供有关耐药亚群的频率和MIC的少许信息; （3）耗时、费力。	[14]
群体谱分析法 PAP test	（1）检测异质性耐药较可靠的方法;（2）能够提供有关耐药亚群频率和MIC的有效信息; （3）可定量分析、准确度高、稳定性好、可重复性好。	（1）操作繁琐且成本昂贵; （2）耗时耗力; （3）技术性强,临床推广应用困难。	[12]
微量稀释群体谱分析法 Microdilution PAP test	（1）比常规PAP测试更快、更便宜; （2）可得知耐药亚群的频率和MIC。	检测的效果取决于细胞密度,误差较大。	[11-12]
改良群体谱分析曲线法 PAP-AUC	（1）hVISA检测的黄金标准; （2）准确性高。	（1）步骤繁琐且成本昂贵; （2）参考hVISA菌株可能会对不同药物浓度具有高度依赖性的耐药亚群分离株进行错误分类,造成假阳性或假阴性结果。	[18]
自动肉汤系统（如VITEK 2、MicroScan、WalkAway） Automated broth systems（for example,VITEK 2,MicroScan,and WalkAway）	临床实验室常规使用药敏试验方法。	在检测耐药亚群方面效果不佳。	[12]
分子检测方法（如探针分析和GeneXpert-Xpert-MTB/RIF-Ultra） Molecular detection methods（for example,line probe assays,GeneXpert Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra）	（1）与传统或自动检测方法相比,更能快速检测异质性耐药; （2）能够准确检测细菌亚群的点突变。（3）有时可直接用于患者样本（如,结核分枝杆菌的痰样本）。	（1）并非所有探针分析系统都能检测耐药亚群,检测效率和稳定性不稳定; （2）依赖于对耐药基因的全面了解,会造成结果差异较大,不适用于所有细菌。	[19]

方法 Methods	优点 Advantages	缺点 Disadvantages	参考文献 Reference
E-test法、K-B纸片扩散法 E-test and Kirby-Bauer test	（1）传统、经典的药敏试验方法; （2）可用于异质性耐药的初筛; （3）操作简便、成本较低、结果直观易判读。	（1）由于平板上的细胞密度低,不易检出低频率出现的耐药亚群; （2）可信度低,假阳性、假阴性检出率较高。	[14]
M-E-test法M-E-test method	（1）可用于异质性耐药的大规模筛选; （2）操作简单。	培养板上细胞密度越高,检测异质性耐药亚群的概率越高,但检测的准确率不稳定,易造成误判。	[11]
GRD E-test、琼脂筛选 GRD E-test and agar screen	（1）临床实验室常规使用的药敏试验方法; （2）用于观察某种程度的耐药性和异质性耐药性之间存在强烈相关性的简单筛选方法（hVISA）。	（1）无法检测异质性耐药; （2）缺乏有关亚群频率和MIC的信息。	[15-16]
微量肉汤稀释法 Broth microdilution（BMD）	临床实验室常规使用的药敏试验方法。	（1）在存在耐药亚群的情况下,MIC的读数高度依赖于耐药细菌的接种密度和生长速率; （2）没有关于耐药亚群频率的信息,其MIC信息较差; （3）操作繁琐。	[17]
琼脂稀释 Agar dilution	临床实验室常规使用的药敏试验方法。	（1）使用耐药细菌的单个小菌落有可能错过低频率的亚群; （2）如果检测到异质性耐药,则提供有关耐药亚群的频率和MIC的少许信息; （3）耗时、费力。	[14]
群体谱分析法 PAP test	（1）检测异质性耐药较可靠的方法;（2）能够提供有关耐药亚群频率和MIC的有效信息; （3）可定量分析、准确度高、稳定性好、可重复性好。	（1）操作繁琐且成本昂贵; （2）耗时耗力; （3）技术性强,临床推广应用困难。	[12]
微量稀释群体谱分析法 Microdilution PAP test	（1）比常规PAP测试更快、更便宜; （2）可得知耐药亚群的频率和MIC。	检测的效果取决于细胞密度,误差较大。	[11-12]
改良群体谱分析曲线法 PAP-AUC	（1）hVISA检测的黄金标准; （2）准确性高。	（1）步骤繁琐且成本昂贵; （2）参考hVISA菌株可能会对不同药物浓度具有高度依赖性的耐药亚群分离株进行错误分类,造成假阳性或假阴性结果。	[18]
自动肉汤系统（如VITEK 2、MicroScan、WalkAway） Automated broth systems（for example,VITEK 2,MicroScan,and WalkAway）	临床实验室常规使用药敏试验方法。	在检测耐药亚群方面效果不佳。	[12]
分子检测方法（如探针分析和GeneXpert-Xpert-MTB/RIF-Ultra） Molecular detection methods（for example,line probe assays,GeneXpert Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra）	（1）与传统或自动检测方法相比,更能快速检测异质性耐药; （2）能够准确检测细菌亚群的点突变。（3）有时可直接用于患者样本（如,结核分枝杆菌的痰样本）。	（1）并非所有探针分析系统都能检测耐药亚群,检测效率和稳定性不稳定; （2）依赖于对耐药基因的全面了解,会造成结果差异较大,不适用于所有细菌。	[19]

抗菌药物名称 Antibiotic	样品（来源） Sample （Sources）	样本数 Number of samples	异质性耐药测定方法Method for determination of heteroresistance	异质性耐药率 Prevalence of heteroresistance/%	耐药率Prevalence of resistance/%	异质性耐药亚群的频次 Frequency of heteroresistant subpopulations	国家/地区Country /Region	文献 Reference
亚胺培南 Imipenem	医院分离株	11	E-test（抑菌圈内菌落生长初步判定异质性） PAP（异质性耐药以MIC/NIC≥8来确定）	0	0	ND	瑞典	[11]
厄他培南 Ertapenem		11		27.3	0	4.20×10^-7- 1.10×10^-5
美罗培南 Meropenem		11		0	0	ND
多利培南 Doripenem		11		0	0	ND
厄他培南 Ertapenem	医院分离株	140	改良PAP	35	2	ND	美国	[22]
亚胺培南 Imipenem		20		25	0
美罗培南 Meropenem		100		30	0
亚胺培南 Imipenem	医院分离株	332	纸片扩散,E-test（抑菌圈内菌落生长确定为异质性）	25	0	8.00×10^-8- 1.80×10^-7	中国重庆	[23]
厄他培南 Ertapenem				17.2	0.6
美罗培南 Meropenem				3.9	0
亚胺培南 Imipenem	医院分离株	200	E-test（抑菌圈内菌落生长确定为异质性） PAP（异质性耐药以MIC/NIC≥8来确定）	29	0	ND	中国广西	[24]
厄他培南 Ertapenem				20.5	2
美罗培南 Meropenem				6	0.5
亚胺培南 Imipenem	血液、尿液和痰液	850	K-B纸片法 E-test PAP（异质性耐药以MIC/NIC≥8来确定）	20.5	0	ND	中国广东	[25]
厄他培南 Ertapenem				17.5	1.5
美罗培南 Meropenem				7	0.5

抗菌药物名称 Antibiotic	样品（来源） Sample （Sources）	样本数 Number of samples	异质性耐药测定方法Method for determination of heteroresistance	异质性耐药率 Prevalence of heteroresistance/%	耐药率Prevalence of resistance/%	异质性耐药亚群的频次 Frequency of heteroresistant subpopulations	国家/地区Country /Region	文献 Reference
亚胺培南 Imipenem	医院分离株	11	E-test（抑菌圈内菌落生长初步判定异质性） PAP（异质性耐药以MIC/NIC≥8来确定）	0	0	ND	瑞典	[11]
厄他培南 Ertapenem		11		27.3	0	4.20×10^-7- 1.10×10^-5
美罗培南 Meropenem		11		0	0	ND
多利培南 Doripenem		11		0	0	ND
厄他培南 Ertapenem	医院分离株	140	改良PAP	35	2	ND	美国	[22]
亚胺培南 Imipenem		20		25	0
美罗培南 Meropenem		100		30	0
亚胺培南 Imipenem	医院分离株	332	纸片扩散,E-test（抑菌圈内菌落生长确定为异质性）	25	0	8.00×10^-8- 1.80×10^-7	中国重庆	[23]
厄他培南 Ertapenem				17.2	0.6
美罗培南 Meropenem				3.9	0
亚胺培南 Imipenem	医院分离株	200	E-test（抑菌圈内菌落生长确定为异质性） PAP（异质性耐药以MIC/NIC≥8来确定）	29	0	ND	中国广西	[24]
厄他培南 Ertapenem				20.5	2
美罗培南 Meropenem				6	0.5
亚胺培南 Imipenem	血液、尿液和痰液	850	K-B纸片法 E-test PAP（异质性耐药以MIC/NIC≥8来确定）	20.5	0	ND	中国广东	[25]
厄他培南 Ertapenem				17.5	1.5
美罗培南 Meropenem				7	0.5

抗菌药物名称 Antibiotic	样品（来源） Sample（Sources）	样本数 Number of samples	异质性耐药测定方法 Method for determination of heteroresistance	异质性耐药率 Prevalence of heteroresistance/%	耐药率 Prevalence of resistance/%	异质性耐药亚群的频次 Frequency of heteroresistant subpopulations	国家/地区Country / Region	文献 Reference
黏菌素 Colistin	临床分离株	11	E-test（抑菌圈内菌落生长初步判定异质性） PAP（异质性耐药以MIC/NIC≥8来确定）	0	0	ND	瑞典	[11]
多黏菌素B Polymyxin B	临床分离株	11	E-test（抑菌圈内菌落生长初步判定异质性） PAP（异质性耐药以MIC/NIC≥8来确定）	0	0	ND
黏菌素 Colistin	血液分离株	292	琼脂筛选[菌落生长在黏菌素（4 mg/L）确定为异质性耐药）]	3.4	0.3	1.25×10^-8-1.10×10^-5	匈牙利	[28]
黏菌素 Colistin	医院分离株	291	PAP（异质性耐药以MIC/NIC≥8来确定） PAP	1.37	0.69	4.00×10^-7-4.00×10^-6	中国温州	[29]
黏菌素 Colistin	猪病料样本、猪肛门拭子	177	PAP（异质性耐药以MIC/NIC≥4来确定）	91.67	0	6.61×10^-7-2.57×10^-6	中国郑州	[30]