Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T20:26:11.894Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Characterization of Mycobacterium chimaera in a heater-cooler unit in Latvia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 October 2020

Janis Kimsis
Affiliation:
Latvian Biomedical Research and Study Centre, Riga, Latvia
Ilva Pole
Affiliation:
Riga East University Hospital, Riga, Latvia
Inga Norvaisa
Affiliation:
Riga East University Hospital, Riga, Latvia
Uga Dumpis
Affiliation:
Pauls Stradins Clinical University Hospital, Riga, Latvia
Renate Ranka*
Affiliation:
Latvian Biomedical Research and Study Centre, Riga, Latvia
*
Author for correspondence: Renate Ranka, E-mail: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Type
Letter to the Editor
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America

To the EditorMycobacterium chimaera (M. chimaera) is an opportunistic environmental mycobacterium belonging to the M. aviumM. intracellulare complex. Transmission of M. chimaera from contaminated heater-cooler unit (HCU) water tanks to patients is a risk during open-heart surgery. Reference Sax, Bloemberg and Hasse1 Specifically, investigations have revealed that the contaminated HCU devices (Stockert 3T) came from one particular manufacturing facility, LivaNova in Munich, Germany, and were a likely source for cardiothoracic surgery–related severe M. chimaera infections that occurred in Switzerland, Germany, The Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. Reference Haller, Höller and Jacobshagen2 The importance of HCUs lies in their ability to regulate the body temperature of a patient during cardiac surgery. However, evidence suggests that the airborne transmission of aerosolized bacteria from the water tanks was responsible for these infections. Reference Haller, Höller and Jacobshagen2 Currently, the extent of global outbreaks is unknown, but the burden of invasive M. chimaera was estimated to be 156–282 cases per year in 10 countries where most cardiac-valve replacements are performed. Reference Sommerstein, Hasse, Marschall, Sax, Genoni, Schlegel, Widmer and Chimaera Taskforce3 We investigated the possible presence of M. chimaera in HCUs in the Cardiothoracic Department, Latvian Centre of Cardiology of Pauls Stradins Clinical University Hospital, Latvia. The water of HCUs was sampled before they underwent the routine disinfection procedure in May, 2017. Samples were cultured on Bactec MGIT 960 system (Becton Dickinson, Heidelberg, Germany). The growth of mycobacteria was observed in 2 samples. DNA was isolated and the M. chimaera was identified using a GenoType NTM-DR version 1.0 kit (Hain Lifescience, Nehren, Germany). Both isolates, designated LV-2017-1-HCU and LV-2017-2-HCU, were subjected to whole-genome sequencing with 150× coverage on an Ion Proton System (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA). For the bioinformatics analysis, reads in samples produced in this study were aligned to the M. chimaera reference genome JCM_14737 (ENA accession no. PRJNA324238) using the bwa MEM algorithm. Variants were called and marked based on the published criteria Reference Svensson, Jensen, Rasmussen, Folkvardsen, Norman and Lillebaek4 using BCFtools. Sequences of both isolates were compared to strains ZUERICH-1 (DSM 101591) and ZUERICH-2 (DSM 101592), representatives of the major M. chimaera groups 1 and 2. Reference van Ingen, Kohl and Kranzer5

For the phylogenetic analysis, raw sequencing reads of the isolates LV-2017-1-HCU and LV-2017-2-HCU were mapped against the M. chimaera type strain FI-01069 (DSM 44623) Reference Tortoli, Rindi and Garcia6 and compared with strain ZUERICH-1 and 127 other publicly available data sets of M. chimaera isolates belonging to subgroup 1.1 and previously collected in Denmark, Germany, The Netherlands, the United Kindgom, Ireland, the United States, Australia, and New Zealand (available in the European Nucleotide Archive; http://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena). Reference Svensson, Jensen, Rasmussen, Folkvardsen, Norman and Lillebaek4,Reference van Ingen, Kohl and Kranzer5,Reference Williamson, Howden and Stinear7 The analysis was performed using CSI Phylogeny 1.4 software, Center of Genomic Epidemiology (https://cge.cbs.dtu.dk/services/CSIPhylogeny/), with default settings but including the reference in the final tree. Reference Kaas, Leekitcharoenphon, Aarestrup and Lund8 Molecular phylogenetic analysis was performed using the maximum likelihood method. The phylogenetic tree was built from 176 SNP positions of 130 M. chimaera isolates and was visualized in MEGA6.

Results

In total, 2,555,838 and 1,544,268 sequencing reads were generated for samples LV-2017-1-HCU and LV-2017-2-HCU, respectively. The sequencing reads were deposited in the European Nucleotide Archive (ENA) under study numbers ERS3734298 and ERS3734299.

Molecular phylogenetic analysis revealed that both Latvian HCU‘s samples were closely related to the strain ZUERICH-1 (Fig. 1A). Specific SNP signatures Reference van Ingen, Kohl and Kranzer5 for subgroup 1.1. (substitutions of guanine (G) by adenine (A) at positions 113,518 and 209,278 of the DSM 44623T genome—GenBank accession no. LQOO00000000) were found in both Latvian isolates. This result suggested that they belong to the subgroup 1.1 which contains most M. chimaera isolates from water systems or exhaust air of LivaNova HCUs in clinical use, isolates from HCUs sampled at the LivaNova production site, and isolates from related patients in different countries. Reference van Ingen, Kohl and Kranzer5

Fig. 1. (A) Molecular phylogenetic analysis of the isolates in the present study using the maximum likelihood method. Both samples were closely related to the strain ZUERICH-1. (B) Maximum likelihood phylogenetic tree built from 176 SNP positions of 130 M. chimaera isolates mapped to the genome of M. chimaera type strain FI-01069. The 2 isolates in the present study are indicated by black circles. Codes of the samples belonging to group 1.1. correspond to those used by van Ingen et al (2017). Note. AU, Australia; D, Germany; NL, The Netherlands; NZ, New Zealand; LV, Latvia; UK, United Kingdom; CH, Switzerland; and DK, Denmark.

During the phylogenetic analysis of the isolates LV-2017-1-HCU and LV-2017-2-HCU, the sequencing coverage was 92.3% and 78% of the reference genome, respectively. The percentage of the reference genome covered by all isolates was 43.8%. As expected, the isolates within the subgroup 1.1 showed little diversity, with a median pairwise distance of 2 SNPs (range, 0–40). Reference van Ingen, Kohl and Kranzer5 A median pairwise distance for the Latvian LV-2017-1-HCU and LV-2017-2-HCU isolates were 32 (range, 31–40) and 4 (range, 3–12) SNPs, respectively. The results showed that M. chimaera sequences from HCU in Latvia genetically clustered with the isolates from HCUs in The Netherlands, the United States, and Germany (samples 110, 128, 180, 187, 2015-22-15-01), as well as isolates from patients in The Netherlands (sample 198) and USA (samples 2015-22-63, 2015-22-79, 2015-22-80) (Fig. 1B).

Discussion

Overall, this is the first report of M. chimaera from HCUs in Latvia, which adds Latvia and the Baltic states to the global map of M. chimaera outbreaks associated with HCUs in hospitals. The presence of M. chimaera in the HCU in the university hospital in Latvia indicated the risk of exposure of patients that could lead to infection. Regular sampling of patients with chronic infections after cardiac surgery in Pauls Stradins Clinical University Hospital has failed to identify M. chimaera–related clinical cases. The HCU produced by LivaNova PLC was replaced with another device in 2018, and new cases of infection could occur over significant period. Reference Kasperbauer and Daley9 HCUs are vulnerable to contamination from water sources, which may lead to infection by nontuberculous mycobacteria such as NTM, including M. gordonae and M. paragordonae, in addition to M. chimaera. Reference Kaelin, Kuster and Hasse10 Thus, further investigations of mycobacterial infections in patients and related medical devices are warranted.

Acknowledgments

Financial support

This study was supported by the Latvian National Research Program VPP “BIOMEDICINE.”

Conflicts of interest

All authors report no conflicts of interest relevant to this article.

References

Sax, H, Bloemberg, G, Hasse, B, et al. Prolonged outbreak of Mycobacterium chimaera infection after open-chest heart surgery. Clin Infect Dis 2015;61:6775.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haller, S, Höller, C, Jacobshagen, A, et al. Contamination during production of heater-cooler units by Mycobacterium chimaera potential cause for invasive cardiovascular infections: results of an outbreak investigation in Germany, April 2015 to February 2016. Euro Surveill 2016;21(17):pii=30215. doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2016.21.17.30215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sommerstein, R, Hasse, B, Marschall, J, Sax, H, Genoni, M, Schlegel, M, Widmer, AF; Chimaera Taskforce, Swiss. Global health estimate of invasive Mycobacterium chimaera infections associated with heater-cooler devices in cardiac surgery. Emerg Infect Dis 2018;24:576578.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Svensson, E, Jensen, ET, Rasmussen, EM, Folkvardsen, DB, Norman, A, Lillebaek, T. Mycobacterium chimaera in heater-cooler units in Denmark related to isolates from the United States and United Kingdom. Emerg Infect Dis 2017;23:507509.Google ScholarPubMed
van Ingen, J, Kohl, TA, Kranzer, K, et al. Global outbreak of severe Mycobacterium chimaera disease after cardiac surgery: a molecular epidemiological study. Lancet Infect Dis 2017;17:10331041.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tortoli, E, Rindi, L, Garcia, MJ, et al. Proposal to elevate the genetic variant MAC-A, included in the Mycobacterium avium complex, to species rank as Mycobacterium chimaera sp. nov. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2004;54:12771285.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Williamson, D, Howden, B, Stinear, T. Mycobacterium chimaera spread from heating and cooling units in heart surgery. N Engl J Med 2017;376:600602.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaas, RS, Leekitcharoenphon, P, Aarestrup, FM, Lund, O. Solving the problem of comparing whole bacterial genomes across different sequencing platforms. PLoS One 2014;9(8):e104984.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kasperbauer, SH, Daley, CL. Mycobacterium chimaera infections related to the heater-cooler unit outbreak: a guide to diagnosis and management. Clin Infect Dis 2019;68:12441250.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaelin, MB, Kuster, SP, Hasse, B, et al. Schreiber PW. Diversity of nontuberculous mycobacteria in heater-cooler devices—results from prospective surveillance. J Hosp Infect 2020;S0195-6701(20)30105-5.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Fig. 1. (A) Molecular phylogenetic analysis of the isolates in the present study using the maximum likelihood method. Both samples were closely related to the strain ZUERICH-1. (B) Maximum likelihood phylogenetic tree built from 176 SNP positions of 130 M. chimaera isolates mapped to the genome of M. chimaera type strain FI-01069. The 2 isolates in the present study are indicated by black circles. Codes of the samples belonging to group 1.1. correspond to those used by van Ingen et al (2017). Note. AU, Australia; D, Germany; NL, The Netherlands; NZ, New Zealand; LV, Latvia; UK, United Kingdom; CH, Switzerland; and DK, Denmark.