Public health approach to detection of non-O157 Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli: summary of two outbreaks and laboratory procedures

Epidemic Intelligence Service, Scientific Education and Professional Development Program Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Epidemiology and Infection (Impact Factor: 2.49). 05/2011; 140(2):283-9. DOI: 10.1017/S0950268811000719
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Routine laboratory testing may not detect non-O157 Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) reliably. Active clinical, epidemiological, environmental health, and laboratory collaboration probably influence successful detection and study of non-O157 STEC infection. We summarized two outbreak investigations in which such coordinated efforts identified non-O157 STEC disease and led to effective control measures. Outbreak 1 involved illness associated with consuming unpasteurized apple cider from a local orchard. Public health personnel were notified by a local hospital; stool specimens from ill persons contained O111 STEC. Outbreak 2 involved bloody diarrhoea at a correctional facility. Public health personnel were notified by the facility infection control officer; O45 STEC was the implicated agent. These reports highlight the ability of non-O157 STEC to cause outbreaks and demonstrate that a coordinated effort by clinicians, infection-control practitioners, clinical diagnostic laboratorians, and public health personnel can lead to effective identification, investigation, and prevention of non-O157 STEC disease.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Escherichia coli serogroup O111 is among the six most commonly reported non-O157:H7 Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC), which are emerging as important foodborne pathogens. We have assembled a collection of environmental and clinical strains of E. coli O111 from diverse sources and investigated various genotypic and phenotypic characteristics of these strains to gain a better understanding of the epidemiology and biology of this serogroup. Sixty-three percent of the strains (24/38) were of H-type 8, which dominated the environmental- and outbreak-strains group, whereas the sporadic-case strains were more heterogeneous in H-type. All of the environmental and outbreak strains harbored the Shiga toxin 1 gene (stx1), eae, and ehx, and a subset of these also carried the Shiga toxin 2 gene (stx2). Only 9 of 16 sporadic-case strains produced stx1 and/or stx2, and these were mostly of H-type 8 and 10. Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis analysis revealed a cluster of environmental, outbreak, and sporadic illness strains with high phylogenetic similarity. Strains in this pulsogroup were all of the H8 type and STEC pathotype, and carried eae and ehx. Smaller clusters of highly similar STEC O111 strains included outbreak and sporadic illness strains isolated during different time periods or from different geographical locations. A distinct aggregative behavior was observed in the cultures of all environmental and outbreak STEC O111 strains, but not in those of sporadic-case strains. Among environmental and outbreaks strains, aggregation was positively correlated with production of curli fimbriae and RpoS function, and negatively with cellulose synthesis, while the nonaggregative behavior of sporadic-case strains correlated (positively) only with cellulose production. Our results indicate that STEC O111 strains sharing high genotypic similarity and important phenotypic traits with STEC O111 outbreak strains are present in the agricultural environment and may contribute to the burden of foodborne disease.
    Foodborne Pathogens and Disease 02/2015; 12(3). DOI:10.1089/fpd.2014.1887 · 2.09 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In summer 2009, the Utah Department of Health investigated an outbreak of Shiga-toxigenic Escherichia coli (STEC) O157:H7 (O157) illness associated with attendance at multiple rodeos. Patients were interviewed regarding exposures during the week before illness onset. A ground beef traceback investigation was performed. Ground beef samples from patient homes and a grocery store were tested for STEC O157. Rodeo managers were interviewed regarding food vendors present and cattle used at the rodeos. Environmental samples were collected from rodeo grounds. Two-enzyme pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) and multiple-locus variable-number tandem repeat analysis (MLVA) were performed on isolates. Fourteen patients with primary STEC O157 illness were reported in this outbreak. Isolates from all patients were indistinguishable by PFGE. Isolates from nine patients had identical MLVA patterns (main outbreak strain), and five had minor differences. Thirteen (93%) patients reported ground beef consumption during the week before illness onset. Results of the ground beef traceback investigation and ground beef sampling were negative. Of 12 primary patients asked specifically about rodeo attendance, all reported having attended a rodeo during the week before illness onset; four rodeos were mentioned. All four rodeos had used bulls from the same cattle supplier. An isolate of STEC O157 identified from a dirt sample collected from the bullpens of one of the attended rodeos was indistinguishable by PFGE and MLVA from the main outbreak strain. Recommendations were provided to rodeo management to keep livestock and manure separate from rodeo attendees. This is the first reported STEC O157 outbreak associated with attendance at multiple rodeos. Public health officials should be aware of the potential for rodeo-associated STEC illness.
    Foodborne Pathogens and Disease 06/2011; 8(10):1131-3. DOI:10.1089/fpd.2011.0884 · 2.09 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We report a case of hemolytic uremic syndrome in a 69-year old woman due to Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli, possibly serotype O111, to illustrate the potentially deleterious implications of a Campylobacter EIA result and the increasing importance of molecular testing when conventional methods are limited.
    Journal of clinical microbiology 12/2013; 52(3). DOI:10.1128/JCM.02855-13 · 4.23 Impact Factor