Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30807599›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

The first isolation of Clostridium difficile RT078/ST11 from pigs in China.

Li-Juan Zhang, Ling Yang, Xi-Xi Gu, Pin-Xian Chen, Jia-Li Fu, Hong-Xia Jiang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Frontiers in microbiology · 2026
    Article
  3. Community-AcquiredInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Antimicrobial resistance ofOne health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2024
    Article
  6. Genomic epidemiology ofEmerging microbes & infections · 2024
    Article
  7. Microorganisms · 2023
    Article
  8. Characterization of Food ChainMicroorganisms · 2023
    Article
  9. Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  10. Characterization of community-acquiredFrontiers in microbiology · 2023
    Article
  11. Detection and Genomic Characterisation ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Raw Animal Meats as Potential Sources ofFood science of animal resources · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc · 2020
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Li-Juan ZhangNational Risk Assessment laboratory for antimicrobial resistance of animal original bacteria, College of Veterinary Medicine, South China Agricultural University (SCAU), Guangzhou, China.
Ling YangNational Risk Assessment laboratory for antimicrobial resistance of animal original bacteria, College of Veterinary Medicine, South China Agricultural University (SCAU), Guangzhou, China.
Xi-Xi GuNational Risk Assessment laboratory for antimicrobial resistance of animal original bacteria, College of Veterinary Medicine, South China Agricultural University (SCAU), Guangzhou, China.
Pin-Xian ChenNational Risk Assessment laboratory for antimicrobial resistance of animal original bacteria, College of Veterinary Medicine, South China Agricultural University (SCAU), Guangzhou, China.
Jia-Li FuNational Risk Assessment laboratory for antimicrobial resistance of animal original bacteria, College of Veterinary Medicine, South China Agricultural University (SCAU), Guangzhou, China.
Hong-Xia JiangNational Risk Assessment laboratory for antimicrobial resistance of animal original bacteria, College of Veterinary Medicine, South China Agricultural University (SCAU), Guangzhou, China.ORCID 0000-0002-8349-2877

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We investigated the molecular characteristics and antimicrobial susceptibility of Clostridium difficile isolated from animals in China. We obtained 538 rectal swabs from pigs, chickens and ducks in 5 provinces during 2015 and 2016. C. difficile isolates were characterized by detection of toxin genes, multilocus sequence typing and ribotyping. And antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed using the agar dilution method. Out of 538 samples, 44 (8.2%) were C. difficile positive with high prevalence in pigs (n = 31). Among these, 39 (88.6%) were toxigenic including 14 (31.8%) that were A+B+CDT+ and 13 (29.5%) A+B+. The remaining 12 (27.3%) were A-B+. We identified 7 ST types and 6 PCR ribotypes. The most predominant type was ST11/RT078 with toxin profile A+B+CDT+ and all were isolated from piglets with diarrhea. ST109 isolates possessed two different toxigenic profiles (A-B-CDT- and A-B+CDT-) and although it was not the most prevalent sequence type, but it was widely distributed between chickens, ducks and pigs in the 5 provinces. All C. difficile isolates were fully susceptible to vancomycin, metronidazole, fidaxomicin, amoxicillin/clavulanate and meropenem but retained resistance to 4 or 5 of the remaining antibiotics, especially cefotaxime, tetracycline, ciprofloxacin, cefoxitin. The RT078/ST11 isolates were simultaneously resistant to cefotaxime, tetracycline, cefoxitin, ciprofloxacin and imipenem. This is the first report of the molecular epidemiology of C. difficile isolated from food animals in China. We identified the epidemic strain RT078/ST11 as the predominate isolate among the animals we screened in our study.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsCefotaximeCefoxitinChickensChinaCiprofloxacinClostridioides difficileDucksImipenemMetronidazoleMolecular EpidemiologyMultilocus Sequence TypingPolymerase Chain ReactionRibotypingSwineAnti-Bacterial AgentsCefotaximeCefoxitinCiprofloxacinImipenemMetronidazoleTetracyclineVancomycin

Identifiers

PMID30807599
PMCPMC6391006

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.