Transmission dynamics of carbapenemase-producing bacteria and mobile genetic elements between hospital and household settings in Benin

Transmission dynamics of carbapenemase-producing bacteria and mobile genetic elements between hospital and household settings in Benin | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Transmission dynamics of carbapenemase-producing bacteria and mobile genetic elements between hospital and household settings in Benin Kevin Sintondji, Victorien Dougnon, Boris Lègba, Beau-Gard Hougbénou, and 4 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7220165/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 16 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Background Patients can acquire resistance to critical carbapenemase-producing bacteria during hospitalization and may transmit them to household contacts after discharge. The present study aimed to assess the transmission of carbapenemase-producing bacteria from hospitals to households through patients and their caregivers. Methods A total of 248 participants were included in this study across 5 hospitals, comprising 81 index patients, 81 caregivers, 58 healthcare workers, and 28 household members. Rectal swabs samples were collected from the participants from admission to discharge and during follow-up at home. Samples were plated on mSuperCARBA™, and obtained isolates were tested for carbapenem resistance. A subset of 41 carbapenem resistant isolates were selected and subjected to Whole Genome Sequencing (WGS) and hybrid assembly analysis to determine genetic relatedness and resistance determinants across sampling networks. Results A total of 412 isolates were recovered from hospital and household settings. Among these, 141 isolates were resistant to carbapenem, predominantly E. coli (40.42%), K. pneumoniae (19.14%), and A. baumannii (10.63%). For those enrolled at hospital, the prevalence of carbapenem-resistant bacterial colonization increased from 7.3% (16/220) at admission to 22.7% (10/44) by day 8 of hospitalization. Among patients or caregivers that were still positive at discharge, the prevalence at home rose from 8.0% (7/87) on day 0 of discharge to 57.1% (8/14) by day 14 of follow-up. Long- and short-read sequencing identified the carbapenem resistance genes blaNDM-5 and blaNDM-1 as the main determinants found in Escherichia coli ST410 and Klebsiella pneumoniae ST147, respectively. Several strains, including Klebsiella pneumoniae (ST147) and Escherichia coli (ST410), showed genetic relatedness and potential transmission within households and between healthcare and home settings. Inc FII and Inc FI conjugative plasmids carried most carbapenemase genes in healthcare and community settings representing another layer of resistance spread via horizontal gene transfer. Conclusion This study reveals, for the first time in Benin, the role of patients and their caregivers in facilitating the spread of antimicrobial resistance between hospitals and the community. Carbapenemase producing bacteria Healthcare Community Benin Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Background Hospitals serve as hotspots for the emergence and transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs), which can colonize patients before or during hospitalization. This colonization increases the risk of subsequent infections and facilitates the dissemination of antimicrobial resistance into the community post-discharge [ 1 ]. Healthcare workers and the hospital environments contribute to the spread of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, leading to hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) [ 2 ]. Contaminated hands, inadequately disinfected medical instruments, and frequently touched surfaces act as key reservoirs for MDR bacteria, posing risks to patients, staff, and the broader community [ 3 ]. Beyond hospital settings, colonized patients act as reservoirs for for MDROs including carbapenem-resistant bacteria (CRB), facilitating household transmission and sustaining the cycle of spread and infection [ 4 ]. While carbapenemase-producing bacteria have been detected in the community, data on their transmission dynamics and risk factors in household settings remain limited [ 5 , 6 ]. Discharged patients and their caregivers, if still colonised, can transmit CRB, particularly in households where close contact is frequent (7). Notably, even short hospital stays (1–5 days) can lead to persistent colonization lasting months or years in the absence of antimicrobial therapy, further increasing the risk of community dissemination [ 8 , 9 ]. In West Africa, systematic CRB surveillance is lacking, but regional prevalence averages 4.6%, with reported rates ranging from 1.6–18.6% [ 10 ]. In Benin, CRB prevalence was estimated 8.1% (64/790) in patients, yet comprehensive surveillance systems for HAIs are absent, and data on CRB transmission dynamics remain sparse [ 11 ]. Existing studies in Benin are small-scale and do not examine hospital-to-household transmission of bacterial resistance. Addressing this knowledge gap is essential for designing effective containment strategies in both healthcare and community settings. This study investigates the role of patients and caregivers in CRB transmission from hospitals to households. It further analyses the genetic relatedness of carbapenem-resistant bacterial isolates and identifies mobile genetic elements involved in resistance spread. Methods Study design and sampling procedure This study was conducted from January to March 2023 in five hospitals in Benin. All newly admitted patients in surgical or pediatric wards who provided informed consent were included in the study. These wards were targeted because those patients, children and others with limited mobility capacity, mostly require a caregiver (a relative, who stayed in the patient’s room, assisted with personal care, and prepared meals) to assist them during hospitalization. Patients in other wards or those who refused consent were excluded. Healthcare workers (nurses and medical doctors) directly involved in patient care and consenting relatives in contact with CRB-positive patients or caregivers were also included. Rectal swabs were systematically collected from patients, caregivers, and healthcare workers at five time points: on admission (D0), and then every 48 hours (D2, D4, D6, and D8) until discharge. For Patients who tested positive at least once during hospitalization and consented to be followed-up, additional samples were collected at their household level from index patients, caregivers and their household contacts (Fig. 1 ). Sampling in the household was conducted over two weeks, with swabs collected on the day of return (D0), 48 hours later (D2), on day 7 (D7), day 9 (D9), and day 14 (D14) post-discharge. All follow-up sampling was performed directly by the research team under strict aseptic conditions. Informed written consent was obtained from all participants. The study was approved by the Ethics and Research Committee of the Institute of Applied Biomedical Sciences (CER-ISBA) under reference number 154. Microbiological analysis Rectal swabs were plated on mSuperCARBATM™ (CHROMagar™, Paris, France) and incubated at 37°C for 18–24 hours. Based on colony color and morphology, distinct bacterial colonies were subcultured on MacConkey agar and incubated under the same conditions, repeating until pure cultures were obtained. A total of 981 samples were collected from 248 participants, yielding 412 pure culture isolates on mSuperCARBATM™ selective media. All isolates underwent species identification using MALDI-TOF and antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) with two carbapenem discs: imipenem (10 µg) and ertapenem (10 µg) following the guidelines of the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing [ 12 ]. At this stage, 141 isolates were found to be resistant to at least one of the tested carbapenems. From this pool, 41 isolates were selected for whole genome sequencing based on species identity, collection time points, and participant origin criteria that could help infer potential transmission events and map possible resistance networks among individuals. These selected isolates were subsequently tested for the carbapenem inactivation method (CIM) using meropenem discs (10 µg) [ 13 ] to confirm carbapenemase production prior to sequencing. E. coli ATCC 29522 served as a negative control, while a clinical strain of E. coli harboring the bla NDM−1 gene was used as a positive control. Whole Genome Sequencing and Bioinformatic Analysis DNA was extracted from the isolates using the Qiagen DNeasy kit, following the manufacturer’s instructions. Short-read whole genome sequencing (WGS) was performed on the Illumina NovaSeq platform, as previously described [ 14 ]. Sequence reads were quality-checked with FastQC (v0.11.9) [ 15 ], trimmed with Fastq [ 16 ], and assembled using SPAdes (v3.15.5) [ 17 ]. The quality of assembled genomes was assessed using QUAST [ 18 ], while taxonomic classification was performed with Kraken2 (v2.14) [ 19 ], and cross-verified with GTDB-Tk (v2.4.0) [ 20 ]. Multi-locus sequence typing (MLST) was conducted using pubMLST (v.2.23) [ 21 ] after species confirmation. Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) genes were identified using Abricate (v1.0.1) [ 22 ] with the ResFinder 4.1 [ 23 ] database for acquired resistance, while the web version of ResFinder was used to detect resistance conferred by chromosomal mutations. Plasmid replicons were identified using Abricate with the PlasmidFinder 2.1 database [ 24 ]. For each species group of interest, core-genome SNP-based phylogenetic analysis was conducted to assess genetic relatedness between isolates obtained at hospital and household levels at different type points. We applied a SNP threshold of ≤ 30 SNPs to infer close genetic relatedness and potential transmission events, aligning with thresholds commonly reported in the literature for Enterobacteriaceae and Acinetobacter . Genome alignment and variant calling were performed using Snippy (v4.6.0) [ 25 ], followed by recombinant removal with Gubbins (v2.4.1) [ 26 ]. Phylogenetic trees were reconstructed using RAxML (v8.2.12) [ 27 ] with 200 bootstrap replicates and visualized in iTOL 3 [ 28 ]. After initial short-read analysis, six isolates ( E . coli , A. baumannii and K. pneumoniae ) suspected to be part of a transmission network were selected for long-read sequencing using Oxford Nanopore technology to obtain fully assembled genomes for comprehensive analysis of mobile genetic elements. These isolates originated from both hospital and community settings and were recovered across different time points. Genomic analysis revealed that they shared key genotypic characteristics, including resistance gene profiles, plasmid content, and sequence types, with other isolates suspected to be part of the same transmission cluster. Hybrid assembly and plasmid reconstruction were performed using both long- and short-read data, as previously described [ 14 ]. The genetic context of carbapenemase-encoding genes on the reconstructed plasmids was examined in all complete genomes, with contigs containing these genes following our previously described protocol [ 14 ]. To put our strains into a regional context, (West Africa) phylogenetic analyses were performed focusing on three key species: Acinetobacter baumannii bla NDM−1 , Escherichia coli ST410 bla NDM−5 , and Klebsiella pneumoniae ST147 bla NDM−5 . These strains were compared with publicly available genomes from West Africa, incorporating metadata on country of origin, year of isolation, and sample type to evaluate genetic relatedness and evolutionary trends. All bioinformatic analysis was performed using customized scripts on the Danish National Life Science high performance computer cluster, Computerome2. Results Distribution of Carbapenem-Resistant Bacteria across hospital and household setting A total of 248 participants were included in this study comprising 81 index patients (65 admitted to pediatric wards and 16 to surgical wards) and 81 matched caregivers. Additionally, 58 healthcare workers and 28 index household members participated. Combining hospital and household phases of the study, we obtained a total of 412 isolates from the msupercarba plates, with 179 from patients, 140 from caregivers, 50 from healthcare workers and 43 from household members during follow-ups. The presumptive species from the selective plate culturing were Escherichia coli (n = 161 isolates), Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 87 isolates), Acinetobacter baumannii (n = 58 isolates), Stenotrophomonas maltophilia (n = 47 isolates), Enterobacter cloacae (n = 28 isolates), Pseudomonas putida (n = 23 isolates), Delftia acidovorans (n = 6 isolates) and Achromobacter xyloxidans (n = 2 isolates). The prevalence of carbapenem-resistant bacteria (CRB) in this study is calculated with the number of isolates that grew on selective CRB plates and confirmed resistant to at least one of the carbapenem drugs tested. CRB colonization was very high in the studied population. A total of 141 isolates were found to be resistant to at least one of the tested carbapenems. The predominant CRB species were Escherichia coli (40.42%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (19.14%) and Acinetobacter baumannii (10. 63%). Prevalence of carbapenem-resistant bacteria colonisation in hospital Of the 220 participants enrolled at hospitals, on their day of admission (D0), only 62 remained under follow-up by day 4, as the majority were discharged early. The overall prevalence of CRB at the hospital, increased from 7.3% on D0 to 22.7% by D8 (Table 1 ). A total of 81 carbapenem resistant isolates were found in samples collecting in hospital setting. The predominant CRB species were Escherichia coli (47.03%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (26.04%) and Acinetobacter baumannii (7.40%). Specifically, the prevalence of CRB among patients ranged from 11.11% (9/81) on admission to 26,31% (5/19) by D8 of hospitalization (Table 1 ). However, in a few instances like on day 6, some patients were unavailable for sampling but were sampled again on day 8 (Table 1 ). A total of 45 CRB were isolated from patients during hospitalization. The predominant CRB species were Escherichia coli (n = 20 isolates), Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 12 isolates) and Acinetobacter baumannii (n = 3 isolates). Among caregivers CRB colonization evolved from 1.23% (1/81) at admission to 18.75% (3/16) by day 8. Similar to the case of patients, some caregivers skipped sampling on day 6 and were sampled again on day 8 (Table 1 ). A total of 20 CRB were isolated from caregivers during their stay in hospital. The predominant CRB species were Escherichia coli (n = 11 isolates), Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 4 isolates) and Acinetobacter baumannii (n = 2 isolates). The number of sampled healthcare workers dropped over time due to their scheduled shifts. However, based on consistent follow-up of the same healthcare workers that were available from day 0 to day 8, the prevalence of CRB increased from 10.34% (6/58) to 22.22% (2/9) on day 8 (Table 1 ). A total of 16 CRB were isolated from caregivers during their stay in hospital. The predominant CRB species were Escherichia coli (n = 8 isolates), Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 6 isolates) and Acinetobacter baumannii (n = 1 isolates). Table 1 Distribution of participants carrying confirmed carbapenem-resistant bacteria (CRB) by sampling day at the hospital Days Patients carrying CRB Caregivers carrying CRB Healthcare workers carrying CRB Number of participants carrying CRB (%) D0 9/81 1/81 6/58 16/220 (7.3) D2 12/79 6/78 3/47 21/204 (10.3) D4 3/22 3/25 0/15 6/62 (9.7) D6 2/11 3/11 0/12 5/34 (14.7) D8 5/19 3/16 2/9 10/44 (22.7) Prevalence of carbapenem-resistant bacteria colonisation in household At discharge, 30 patients had tested positive at least once during hospitalization. Of these, 29 patients and 28 household contacts consented to home follow-up. The corresponding 30 caregivers were also included in the household follow-up phase. The overall prevalence of CRB colonization at home on D0 of return was 8% increasing to 57.1% by D14 during the follow-up (Table 2 ). A total of 60 carbapenem resistant isolates were found in samples collecting in household setting. The species at home were consistent with those that were detected in hospital setting i.e. Escherichia coli (30%), Acinetobacter baumannii (15%) and Klebsiella pneumoniae (8.33%). Specifically, the prevalence of CRB among patients at household ranged from 13.79% (4/29) on admission to 40% (2/5) by D14 (Table 2 ). It is important to note that some patients were unavailable for sampling at certain time points during the 14-day follow-up. A total of 27 CRB were isolated from patients at household. The predominant CRB species were Escherichia coli (n = 9 isolates), Acinetobacter baumannii (n = 5 isolates) and Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 2 isolates). Among caregivers CRB colonization reached 60% (3/5) by day 14. As observed with patients, some caregivers were not available for sampling at certain time points during the 14-day follow-up period (Table 2 ). A total of 14 CRB were isolated from caregivers at household. The predominant CRB species were Escherichia coli (n = 5 isolates), Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 2 isolates) and Acinetobacter baumannii (n = 2 isolates). At the household level, 10.71% (3/28) of household contacts were already colonized with CRB on the day the index patient or caregiver returned home. This proportion increased to 75% (3/4) by day 14 (Table 2 ). Among the 25 household members who initially tested negative upon the return of a positive patient or caregiver, 6 became colonized with CRB over time. A total of 19 CRB were isolated from household contact the follow up. The predominant CRB species were Escherichia coli (n = 4 isolates), Acinetobacter baumannii (n = 2 isolates) and Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 1 isolate). Table 2 Distribution of participants carrying carbapenem-resistant bacteria (CRB) by sampling day in households. Day Patients carrying carbapenem resistant bacteria Patients Guards carrying carbapenem resistant bacteria Household contacts carrying carbapenem resistant bacteria (total) Number of participants carrying carbapenem resistant bacteria (total) D0 4/29 0/30 3/28 7/87 = 8% D2 6/16 4/14 3/25 13/55 = 23.6% D7 5/21 4/23 4/21 13/65 = 20% D9 1/10 1/13 1/5 3/28 = 10.7% D14 2/5 3/5 3/4 8/14 = 57.1% Distribution of the bacterial species by whole genome sequencing (WGS) A total of 141 isolates were resistant to one of the carbapenem tested, from which 41 were selected for short-reads WGS to support the clinical study. The selection was made to represent each sampling group and potential species sharing cases identified above. Before sequencing the 41 isolates were further confirmed by meropenem inactivation test and all tested positive. Among sequenced genomes, Escherichia coli was the most prevalent species (34.1%, n = 14), followed by Klebsiella pneumoniae (29.3%, n = 12) and Acinetobacter baumannii (14.6%, n = 6). Stenotrophomonas maltophilia (14.6%, n = 6) were found to be sequenced and were excluded for further analysis. Distribution of Resistance genes All sequenced isolates, except Pseudomonas putida , carried at least one carbapenem or cephalosporin resistant genes (Table 3 ). Among Escherichia coli isolates, bla NDM−5 (n = 6) and bla OXA−181 (n = 6) were the most frequently carbapenemase genes. Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 10) and Acinetobacter baumannii (n = 5) predominanly harbored bla NDM−1 . The bla VIM−5 gene was found exclusively in Achromobacter xyloxidans (n = 2). The most commonly detected ESBL gene was bla CTX−M−15 (n = 16). Table 3 Distribution of carbapenemase and ESBL resistance genes among sequenced isolates. Bacterial species (n) bla NDM-1 bla NDM-5 bla OXA-181 bla OXA-like bla VIM-5 bla CTX-M-15 CMY-2 bla CTX-M-36 Escherichia coli (14) 0 6 6 0 0 4 11 2 Klebsiella pneumoniae (12) 10 1 0 1 0 12 0 0 Acinetobacter baumannii (6) 5 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 Achromobater xylosoxidans (2) 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 Pseudomonas putida (1) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Genetic characteristics of carbapenem-resistant isolates harbouring plasmids The most represented sequence types (STs) were Escherichia coli ST410 (n = 11) and Klebsiella pneumoniae ST147 (n = 10). Among Acinetobacter baumanii isolates, ST860 (n = 3) was the most represented lineage (Table 4 ). Table 4 Distribution of sequence types among selected sequenced genomes. Bacterial isolates ST410 ST167 ST657 ST147 ST967 ST11 ST860 ST1463 ST107 Escherichia coli (14) 11 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Klebsiella pneumoniae (12) 0 0 0 10 1 1 0 0 0 Acinetobacter baumannii (5) 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 1 Among the sequenced isolates, Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae were the only species harboring plasmids. All Escherichia coli ST410 (n = 11) isolate harboured the IncFII plasmid type. None Acinetobacter baumanii isolates carried plasmids (Table 5 ). Table 5 Plasmid replicons present in selected sequenced genomes. IncFII IncX3 IncXI IncR IncFII IncFIB IncHI1B IncL/M Escherichia coli (14) 11 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 Klebsiella pneumoniae (12) 0 0 0 0 2 8 1 1 Genetic context of carbapenem resistance genes After initial short-read analysis, six isolates ( E . coli , A. baumannii and K. pneumoniae ) suspected to be part of a transmission network were selected for long-read sequencing using Oxford Nanopore technology to obtain fully assembled genomes for comprehensive analysis. These isolates originated from both hospital and community settings and were recovered across multiple time points. Genomic analysis revealed that they shared key genotypic characteristics, including resistance gene profiles, plasmid content, and sequence types, with other isolates suspected to be part of the same transmission cluster. Hybrid assemblies (Fig. 2 ) illustrate the genetic context of carbapenemase genes in Escherichia coli (panel a); Acinetobacter baumannii (panel b) and Klebsiella pneumoniae (panel c). These analyses reveal that plasmids of the same IncF family are responsible for mobilizing bla NDM genes in E. coli and K. pneumoniae isolates from both hospitals and household environments. In Acinetobacter baumanii , where carbapenem resistance is chromosomally encoded, bla NDM genes are located within an insertion sequence (IS Aba 125 ) carrying the composite transposon Tn 125 (Fig. 2 , Panel C). Hybrid genome assemblies were further used to reconstruct the genetic context of the two representative carbapenemase-carrying plasmids (Fig. 3 ). The predominant plasmid types mediating dissemination in both healthcare and community settings were IncF types (IncFII for bla NDM−5 and IncFI for bla NDM−1 ). These carbapenemase genes were concentrated in genome regions co-localized with multiple antimicrobial resistance determinants. Genomic transmission networks We reconstructed the transmission networks of carbapenemase-producing bacterial strains identified in this study (Fig. 4 ). Three Acinetobacter baumannii ST860 strains carrying the bla NDM−1 gene were isolated from a discharged patient (C22), their caregiver (C26, initially negative upon the patient’s return home), and a household contact (C24, also initially negative) (Fig. 4 a). The caregiver and household contact tested positive two days after the index patient’s return. However, SNP analysis (≥ 30) did not confirm their genetic relatedness. Persistent colonization was observed in patient 3 from hospital admission (Day 0) through Day 14 at home (M33, M50, M51, and M69) (Fig. 4 b). Additionally, three K. pneumoniae ST147 isolates were recovered from the patient’s caregiver between Day 2 and Day 14 at home (M34, M53, and M70). SNP analysis revealed ≤ 30 differences between these genomes, indicating a closely related genetic background and suggesting that the strain was introduced into the household by the discharged patient. A potential transmission event was identified from the caregiver of patient 1 on Day 7 in the hospital (L62) to patient 1 on Day 2 at home after discharge (L71) (Fig. 4 c). Core-genome SNP analysis revealed approximately 20 SNP differences, confirming a closely related genetic background and supporting the transmission of E. coli ST410 from hospital to household. A potential transmission event of E. coli ST410 was also observed from the caregiver of patient 3 on Day 4 at home (T18), persisting in the caregiver until Day 9 (T34), and subsequently detected in both patient 3 and their household contact on Day 9 (T33, T34) with ≤ 20 SNP differences (Fig. 4 d). Patient 3 was found colonized with this strain on Day 2 of hospitalization, and the isolate was confirmed via long-read sequencing. Given the timeline, this event suggests community-level transmission of a multidrug-resistant clone. Whole genome-based phylogenetic tree Figure 5 presents core-genome phylogenetic analyses of Acinetobacter baumannii (Fig. 5 a), Escherichia coli ST410 (Fig. 5 b), and Klebsiella pneumoniae ST147 (Fig. 5 c). These analyses illustrate phylogenetic clustering based on country of origin, year of isolation, and sample type. Newly sequenced strains are compared with publicly available genomes carrying similar genetic markers ( bla NDM−1 or bla NDM−5 ), providing insights into their genetic relationships and potential transmission pathways. The blue shading in Fig. 5 indicates the clade of isolates from this study. Two distinct phylogenetic clusters were observed for A. baumannii carrying bla NDM−1 . One cluster represented strains from Benin, which were genetically distinct from Nigerian isolates, suggesting localized evolutionary divergence (Fig. 5 a). These strains were isolated from diverse clinical samples (blood, rectal swabs, and wound samples), indicating a consistent infection source within the region but clear geographical differentiation. E. coli ST410 carrying bla NDM−5 demonstrated phylogenetic closeness between strains from this study and those from Nigeria, forming a tightly clustered lineage (Fig. 5 b). This suggests regional dissemination of a shared genetic lineage. Samples were obtained from urine, rectal swabs, and wounds across multiple years (2020–2023), indicating the sustained circulation of this lineage. K. pneumoniae ST147 carrying bla NDM−5 formed a distinct cluster positioned between Nigerian and Ghanaian isolates, suggesting intermediate evolutionary traits (Fig. 5 c). Compared to older regional isolates, the strains in this study demonstrated closer phylogenetic relationships for strains, indicating potential recent transmission events. Discussion The overall prevalence of carbapenem-resistant bacteria (CRB) colonization in the study population was 7.3% at hospital admission (D0), rising to 22.7% by D8. These findings align with studies conducted in Turkey and Kenya, where the prevalence of CRB carriage at admission was 12.5% [ 4 , 29 ]. Similarly, in India, 6.6% of hospitalized patients were colonized with carbapenem-resistant bacteria [ 29 ]. However, our results contrast with the significantly higher prevalence (52%) reported among patients in Vietnamese hospitals [ 30 ], which may be attributed to differences in sample size, study design, and local infection control measures. The increasing prevalence of CRB colonization during hospitalization suggests nosocomial transmission, likely facilitated by direct patient-to-patient contact, healthcare worker-to-patient interactions, or contaminated fomites, particularly in settings with suboptimal infection prevention and control practices [ 31 ]. Furthermore, this study observed both acquisition and loss of CRB colonization over time, consistent with previous findings [ 7 ]. In the household setting, CRB colonization was detected in 8% of participants at D0, increasing to 57.1% by D14. This is notably higher than the 14.4% prevalence reported in a community study from Rawalpindi, Pakistan [ 32 ]. These findings suggest that community CRB carriage contributes to resistant strain spread in healthcare, highlighting the need for broader infection control strategies. Based on presumptive species identification from selective mSuperCarba plates, a diverse range of Gram-negative bacterial species was recovered across hospital and household settings, totaling 412 isolates. The most frequently detected species were Escherichia coli (n = 161), Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 87), and Acinetobacter baumannii (n = 58). Among the 141 isolates confirmed to be resistant to at least one of the tested carbapenems, the predominant species were E. coli (40.42%), K. pneumoniae (19.14%), and A. baumannii (10.63%). These proportions suggest that these three species were the major contributors to carbapenem resistance in the studied population. A subset of 41 isolates comprising predominantly Escherichia coli (34.1%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (29.3%), and Acinetobacter baumannii (14.6%) was selected for whole-genome sequencing. This subset was chosen to facilitate the investigation of potential transmission events and to characterize resistance dissemination networks across hospital and household environments. E. coli isolates harboring bla NDM-5 and bla OXA-181 were detected for the first time in Benin. The spread of bla NDM-5 and bla OXA-181 -producing E. coli has also been reported in Chad [ 33 ]. Among K. pneumoniae and A. baumannii isolates, bla NDM-1 was the most frequently detected carbapenemase gene, consistent with findings from South Africa [ 34 ]. Similarly, A. baumannii producing New Delhi metallo-β-lactamase-1 (NDM-1) had previously been identified in a clinical setting in Benin [ 35 ]. Furthermore, this study is the first to report the presence of the bla VIM-5 gene in Achromobacter xylosoxidans isolates in Benin. Previously, carbapenem-resistant A. xylosoxidans carrying the bla VIM-2 gene had been reported only in a European setting [ 36 ]. The growing Africa-Europe travel likely spreads resistant strains beyond their original epidemiological contexts. The transmission networks of carbapenemase-producing bacteria reveal complex dynamics, with both direct and indirect transmission occurring in close-contact settings. While some strains, such as Klebsiella pneumoniae ST147 and Escherichia coli ST410, exhibit clear genetic links indicative of household transmission, others, like Acinetobacter baumannii ST860, show high genetic diversity, suggesting multiple introduction events or independent transmission routes. These findings highlight the importance of genomic surveillance in detecting hidden carbapenem-resistant bacteria transmission, aiding outbreak investigations, and improving infection control [ 37 ]. Consistent with previous studies, this study confirms the persistence of colonization by resistant organisms even after patient discharge and highlights the occurrence of transmission in household settings [ 38 ]. The predominance of E. coli clone ST410 (n = 11) in this study, along with its detection in Ghana, suggests a broader clonal dissemination across West Africa [ 39 ]. Among K. pneumoniae isolates, ST147 (n = 10) was the most represented. The spread of NDM-1-producing K. pneumoniae ST147 has also been reported in Tunisian hospitals [ 40 ], emphasizing its potential role in hospital outbreaks in Benin. The widespread distribution of IncF-type plasmids harboring carbapenemase genes among hospitalized patients has been extensively documented [ 41 , 42 ]. Previous studies have demonstrated a conserved genetic arrangement among NDM-producing isolates [ 43 ], with similar configurations reported across multiple countries and continents. This widespread conservation suggests that these plasmids, particularly in E. coli , contribute significantly to global antimicrobial resistance and predict resistance to a broad range of antibiotics [ 44 ]. A major limitation of this study lies in the substantial loss to follow-up, both within the hospital setting and after discharge at the household level. The primary reason for this loss is linked to the structure of patient care in the pediatric ward. Out of 81 patients enrolled, 65 were admitted to the pediatric unit where the average duration of stay was relatively short typically two to three days. As a result, many caregivers and family members who accompanied the children also left shortly after hospital day two. Furthermore, some samples could not be collected during hospitalization due to the patients' clinical conditions, leading to gaps in daily follow-up (for instance Day 6 and Day 8). In this study, Day 0 (D0) in the household context was defined as the day of hospital discharge. On that day, it was relatively easy to collect samples from the patients who had tested positive, as they were still available and accessible. However, follow-up at home proved more challenging. Household-level follow-up was dependent on the availability and willingness of the discharged patient and their household contacts. To mitigate this limitation, the follow-up period was extended from the initially planned 7 days to 14 days, in an attempt to improve the chances of reaching and sampling household contacts. Despite this adjustment, the follow-up coverage remained insufficient, and data completeness was not achieved. Finaly, for the household phase, the study focuses on patient and caregiver transmission, omitting healthcare workers as potential vectors of transmission from heathcare to community settings. This was because we did not have healthcare workers consent to follow them up at household levels and this should be further considered in future studies. Conclusion The findings highlight the role of patients in facilitating the spread of carbapenem-resistant bacteria between healthcare settings and the community. Genomic surveillance is crucial to mapping transmission and understanding resistance dynamics. Ongoing monitoring and targeted interventions are important for control and public health. Abbreviations AST : Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing CMY : Cephamycinase CRB : Carbapenem-Resistant Bacteria CTX-M : Cefotaximase-Munich HAIs : Hospital-Acquired Infections ISAba125 : Insertion Sequence Aba125 MDROs : Multidrug-Resistant Organisms NDM : New Delhi Metallo-β-lactamase Oxa : Oxacillinase STs : Sequence Types Tn125 : Transposon 125 VIM : Verona Integron-encoded Metallo-β-lactamase Declarations Acknowledgments The authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to Arielle Kounou, Lydie Comlan, Lidwine Aidodo, Belvida Houndonougbo, Claudiane Adigbonon for their invaluable assistance during the implementation of this study. We also thank all the staff of the participating hospitals for their cooperation and support in ensuring the best possible care for the patients. Lastly, we appreciate the participation of all study participants. Author Contributions V.D., Y.M.G.H., and K.S wrote the protocol. K.S., B.L., B.H., K.F and H.K., collected and processed the samples. Y.M.G.H., K.S., B.H and B.L., did the bioinformatics analyses. K.S., Y.M.G.H., V.D., and A.D wrote the draft of the manuscript, Y.M.G.H, V.D and A.D. provided funding. Funding This study received support from existing funding at the University of Copenhagen, including the following projects: The Danish International Development Assistance (DANIDA) funded projects “Health and Antibiotics in Vietnamese Pig Production” (grant DFC file 17-M06-KU) and “Salmonella Control in the Colombian Pig Industry” (grant DFC file 18-M07-KU); and the Innovation Fund Denmark (IFD) under the umbrella of the JPIAMR (Joint Programming Initiative on Antimicrobial Resistance, Research Project: 2022-02-15 - 2025-02-14). Data availability The sequenced genomes (both Illumina and Nanopore) that support the findings of this study have been deposited in the European Nucleotide Archive under the project accession number PRJEB85980. Ethical approval and Consent to Participate The study was approved by the Ethics and Research Committee of the Institute of Applied Biomedical Sciences (CER-ISBA) under reference number 154. The research work (sampling from hospitalized patients, sample processing and data analysis) in our study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Written informed consent was obtained from each patient or their parent/guardian before participation, accompanied by a concise explanation of the study’s objective. Patients were provided the option to decline participation (opt-out) if they chose. Consent to publish All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Competing Interest The authors declare no conflict of interest. References Tseng WP, Chen YC, Chen SY, Chen SY, Chang SC. Risk for subsequent infection and mortality after hospitalization among patients with multidrug-resistant gram-negative bacteria colonization or infection. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2018;7(1):93. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13756-018-0388-z. La Fauci V, Costa GB, Genovese C, Palamara MAR, Alessi V, Squeri R. Drug-resistant bacteria on hands of healthcare workers and in the patient area: an environmental survey in Southern Italy’s hospital. Rev Esp Quimioter. 2019;32(4):303‑10. Suleyman G, Alangaden G, Bardossy AC. The Role of Environmental Contamination in the Transmission of Nosocomial Pathogens and Healthcare-Associated Infections. Curr Infect Dis Rep. 2018;20(6):12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11908-018-0620-2. Omulo S, Ita T, Mugoh R, Ayodo C, Luvsansharav U, Bollinger S, et al. Risk Factors for Colonization With Extended-Spectrum Cephalosporin-Resistant and Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacterales Among Hospitalized Patients in Kenya: An Antibiotic Resistance in Communities and Hospitals (ARCH) Study. Clin Infect Dis. 2023;77:97‑103. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciad258. Rodriguez-Bano J, Lopez-Cerero L, Navarro MD, de Alba PD, Pascual A. Faecal carriage of extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli : prevalence, risk factors and molecular epidemiology. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2008;62(5):1142‑9. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkn293. Valverde A, Grill F, Coque TM, Pintado V, Baquero F, Cantón R, et al. High rate of intestinal colonization with extended-spectrum-β-lactamase-producing organisms in household contacts of infected community patients. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2008;46(8):2796‑9. https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.01008-08. Haverkate MR, Platteel TN, Fluit AC, Stuart JC, Leverstein-van Hall MA, Thijsen SF, et al. Quantifying within-household transmission of extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing bacteria. CMI. 2017;23(1):46-e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2016.08.021. Zahar JR, Lanternier F, Mechai F, Filley F, Taieb F, Mainot EL, et al. Duration of colonisation by Enterobacteriaceae producing extended-spectrum β-lactamase and risk factors for persistent faecal carriage. JHI. 2010;75(1):76‑8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2009.11.010. Xu M, Zeng J. Analysis of factors influencing the risk of secondary infection in patients colonized or infected with multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria following hospitalization. Microb. Pathog. 2024;190:106637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micpath.2024.106637. Dossouvi KM, Bakpatina-Batako KD. Carbapenem resistance in West Africa: a systematic review. Microbiol. Indep. Res. J. 2024;11:25‑56. https://doi.org/10.18527/2024112556. Yehouenou C, Nagalo A, Kabore OD, Ouedraogo AS. Perspectives : apport du diagnostic dans la lutte contre la résistance aux antimicrobiens en Afrique de l’Ouest. MMI Formation. 2023;2(1):19‑25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mmifmc.2023.01.001-. EUCAST, Comité de l’Antibiograme de la Société Française de Microbiologie. Société Française de Microbiologie. 2022; https://www.sfm-microbiologie.org/boutique/comite-de-lantibiograme-de-la-sfm-casfm/. Accessed 4 Jul 2023. van der Zwaluw K, de Haan A, Pluister GN, Bootsma HJ, de Neeling AJ, Schouls LM. The carbapenem inactivation method (CIM), a simple and low-cost alternative for the Carba NP test to assess phenotypic carbapenemase activity in gram-negative rods. PloS one. 2015;10(3):e0123690. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0123690. Hounmanou YMG, Wanyana A, Alafi S, Wabwire-Mangen F, Christensen H, Olsen JE, et al. Whole strains vs MGEs in short and longterm transmission of ESBL genes between healthcare and community settings in Uganda. Sci Rep. 2023;13(1):10229. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-35879-x. Simon A. Babraham Bioinformatics - FastQC A Quality Control tool for High Throughput Sequence Data. 2010. https://www.bioinformatics.babraham.ac.uk/projects/fastqc/. Accessed 4 Jan 2025. Chen S, Zhou Y, Chen Y, Gu J. fastp: an ultra-fast all-in-one FASTQ preprocessor. Bioinformatics. 2018;34(17):884‑90. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/bty560. Bankevich A, Nurk S, Antipov D, Gurevich AA, Dvorkin M, Kulikov AS, et al. SPAdes: a new genome assembly algorithm and its applications to single-cell sequencing. J Comput Biol. 2012;19(5):455‑77. https://doi.org/10.1089/cmb.2012.0021. Gurevich A, Saveliev V, Vyahhi N, Tesler G. QUAST: quality assessment tool for genome assemblies. Bioinformatics. 2013;29(8):1072‑5. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btt086. Wood DE, Lu J, Langmead B. Improved metagenomic analysis with Kraken 2. Genome Biol. 2019;20(1):257. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-019-1891-0. Chaumeil PA, Mussig AJ, Hugenholtz P, Parks DH. GTDB-Tk v2: memory friendly classification with the genome taxonomy database. Bioinformatics. 2022;38(23):5315‑6. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btac672. Jolley KA, Maiden MCJ. BIGSdb: Scalable analysis of bacterial genome variation at the population level. BMC Bioinformatics. 2010;11:595. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-11-595. Seemann T. tseemann/abricate. 2025. https://github.com/tseemann/abricate. Accessed 4 Jan 2025. Bortolaia V, Kaas RS, Ruppe E, Roberts MC, Schwarz S, Cattoir V, et al. ResFinder 4.0 for predictions of phenotypes from genotypes. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2020;75(12):3491‑500. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkaa345. Carattoli A, Zankari E, García-Fernández A, Voldby Larsen M, Lund O, Villa L, et al. In silico detection and typing of plasmids using PlasmidFinder and plasmid multilocus sequence typing. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014;58(7):3895‑903. Seemann T. tseemann/snippy. 2025. Available: https://github.com/tseemann/snippy. Accessed 4 Jan 2025. Croucher NJ, Page AJ, Connor TR, Delaney AJ, Keane JA, Bentley SD, et al. Rapid phylogenetic analysis of large samples of recombinant bacterial whole genome sequences using Gubbins. Nucleic Acids Res. 2015;43(3):15. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gku1196. Stamatakis A. RAxML version 8: a tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies. Bioinformatics. 2014;30(9):1312‑3. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btu033. Letunic I, Bork P. Interactive tree of life (iTOL) v3: an online tool for the display and annotation of phylogenetic and other trees. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016;44(1):242-245. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkw290. Kizilates F, Yakupogullari Y, Berk H, Oztoprak N, Otlu B. Risk factors for fecal carriage of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing and carbapenem-resistant Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae strains among patients at hospital admission. Am.J.Infect.Control. 2021;49(3):333‑9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2020.07.035 Mittal G, Gaind R, Kumar D, Kaushik G, Gupta KB, Verma PK, et al. Risk factors for fecal carriage of carbapenemase producing Enterobacteriaceae among intensive care unit patients from a tertiary care center in India. BMC Microbiol. 2016;16(1):1‑10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12866-016-0763-y Tran DM, Larsson M, Olson L, Hoang NTB, Le NK, Khu DTK, et al. High prevalence of colonisation with carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae among patients admitted to Vietnamese hospitals: Risk factors and burden of disease. J Infect. 2019;79(2):115‑22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2019.05.013. Rodríguez-Villodres Á, Martín-Gandul C, Peñalva G, Guisado-Gil AB, Crespo-Rivas JC, Pachón-Ibáñez ME, et al. Prevalence and Risk Factors for Multidrug-Resistant Organisms Colonization in Long-Term Care Facilities Around the World: A Review. Antibiotics. 2021;10(6):680. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics10060680. Habib A, Lo S, Villageois-Tran K, Petitjean M, Malik SA, Armand-Lefèvre L, Ruppé E, Zahra R. Dissemination of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales in the community of Rawalpindi, Pakistan. PLoS One. 2022 8;17(7):e0270707. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0270707. Ouchar Mahamat O, Lounnas M, Hide M, Tidjani A, Benavides J, Diack A, et al. Spread of NDM-5 and OXA-181 Carbapenemase-Producing Escherichia coli in Chad. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2019;63(11): e00646-19. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.00646-19. Perovic O, Britz E, Chetty V, Singh-Moodley A. Molecular detection of carbapenemase-producing genes in referral Enterobacteriaceae in South Africa: A short report. S Afr Med J. 2016;106(10):975. https://doi.org/10.7196/samj.2016.v106i10.11300. Yehouenou C, Bogaerts B, Vanneste K, Roosens NH, De Keersmaecker SC, Marchal K, et al. First detection of a plasmid-encoded New-Delhi metallo-beta-lactamase-1 (NDM-1) producing Acinetobacter baumannii using whole genome sequencing, isolated in a clinical setting in Benin. Ann. clin. microbiol. antimicrob. 2021;20(1):1‑7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12941-020-00411-w. Sofianou D, Markogiannakis A, Metzidie E, Pournaras S, Tsakris A. VIM-2 metallo-β-lactamase in Achromobacter xylosoxidans in Europe. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2005;24(12):854‑5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10096-005-0054-2. Sherry NL, Gorrie CL, Kwong JC, Higgs C, Stuart RL, Marshall C, et al. Multi-site implementation of whole genome sequencing for hospital infection control: A prospective genomic epidemiological analysis. Lancet Reg. Health West. Pac. 2022; 23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lanwpc.2022.100446. Top J, Verschuuren TD, Viveen MC, Riccio ME, Harbarth S, Kluytmans JAJW, et al. Gut microbiome dynamics in index patients colonized with extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Enterobacterales after hospital discharge and their household contacts. Microbiol. Spectr. 2023;11(6):e01275-23. https://doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.01275-23. Mahazu S, Prah I, Ayibieke A, Sato W, Hayashi T, Suzuki T, et al. Possible Dissemination of Escherichia coli Sequence Type 410 Closely Related to B4/H24RxC in Ghana. Front Microbiol. 2021;12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2021.770130. Messaoudi A, Haenni M, Mansour W, Saras E, Bel Haj Khalifa A, Chaouch C, et al. ST147 NDM-1-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae spread in two Tunisian hospitals. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2017;72(1):315‑6. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkw401. Oliveira ÉM de, Beltrão EMB, Scavuzzi AML, Barros JF, Lopes ACS. High plasmid variability, and the presence of IncFIB, IncQ, IncA/C, IncHI1B, and IncL/M in clinical isolates of Klebsiella pneumoniae with bla KPC and bla NDM from patients at a public hospital in Brazil. Rev Soc Bras Med Trop. 2020;53:e20200397. https://doi.org/10.1590/0037-8682-0397-2020. Turton JF, Pike R, Perry C, Jenkins C, Turton JA, Meunier D, et al. Wide distribution of Escherichia coli carrying IncF plasmids containing bla NDM-5 and rmtB resistance genes from hospitalized patients in England. J. Med. Microbiol. 2022;71(8). https://doi.org/10.1099/jmm.0.001569. Eger E, Heiden SE, Korolew K, Bayingana C, Ndoli JM, Sendegeya A, et al. Circulation of Extended-Spectrum Beta-Lactamase-Producing Escherichia coli of Pandemic Sequence Types 131, 648, and 410 Among Hospitalized Patients, Caregivers, and the Community in Rwanda. Front Microbiol. 2021;12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2021.662575. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 12 Feb, 2026 Reviews received at journal 16 Jan, 2026 Reviews received at journal 16 Jan, 2026 Reviews received at journal 13 Jan, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 08 Jan, 2026 Reviews received at journal 07 Jan, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 03 Jan, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 02 Jan, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 02 Jan, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 02 Jan, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 01 Jan, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 21 Oct, 2025 Reviewers invited by journal 25 Sep, 2025 Editor assigned by journal 30 Jul, 2025 Submission checks completed at journal 30 Jul, 2025 First submitted to journal 26 Jul, 2025 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7220165","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":524798998,"identity":"3cd0a674-9ac6-4a92-b8b9-e8b972a49740","order_by":0,"name":"Kevin Sintondji","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Abomey-Calavi","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Kevin","middleName":"","lastName":"Sintondji","suffix":""},{"id":524798999,"identity":"799fc298-135d-4bc1-9c8a-0b273130aacf","order_by":1,"name":"Victorien Dougnon","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Abomey-Calavi","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Victorien","middleName":"","lastName":"Dougnon","suffix":""},{"id":524799000,"identity":"3188045d-0206-41d9-bd2a-c84b2d5c7360","order_by":2,"name":"Boris Lègba","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Abomey-Calavi","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Boris","middleName":"","lastName":"Lègba","suffix":""},{"id":524799001,"identity":"53f8aca4-105b-475a-a8e0-81d3fdbfa09e","order_by":3,"name":"Beau-Gard Hougbénou","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Abomey-Calavi","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Beau-Gard","middleName":"","lastName":"Hougbénou","suffix":""},{"id":524799002,"identity":"448b6db2-3a96-46ee-b311-7044a5919539","order_by":4,"name":"Kafayath Fabiyi","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Abomey-Calavi","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Kafayath","middleName":"","lastName":"Fabiyi","suffix":""},{"id":524799003,"identity":"9fc03b93-e2ef-4723-a533-da12323a5980","order_by":5,"name":"Hornel Koudokpon","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Abomey-Calavi","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Hornel","middleName":"","lastName":"Koudokpon","suffix":""},{"id":524799004,"identity":"6ae6cc61-e72d-435a-9de4-4f19ba22bfb7","order_by":6,"name":"Anders Daalsgard","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Copenhagen","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Anders","middleName":"","lastName":"Daalsgard","suffix":""},{"id":524799005,"identity":"6afbdf4f-15ff-455e-916e-cf3ba369c9f5","order_by":7,"name":"Yaovi Mahuton Gildas Hounmanou","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Abomey-Calavi","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Yaovi","middleName":"Mahuton Gildas","lastName":"Hounmanou","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-07-26 09:38:15","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7220165/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7220165/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":93015916,"identity":"a958130a-4fdb-4632-9eeb-df1534478b8b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-08 08:01:29","extension":"docx","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":298156,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Fig.1.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7220165/v1/8af265ccd879232a4528a7e8.docx"},{"id":93017259,"identity":"d573177d-890c-4cd2-b560-e56154bfbf7e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-08 08:09:29","extension":"docx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":5240504,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"TransmissionDynamicsMicrobiologyresearchgilARICFinal.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7220165/v1/0f772e1abfc32001ab85f225.docx"},{"id":93015919,"identity":"7262a0ac-4409-4975-beed-eacdf50572b4","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-08 08:01:29","extension":"docx","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":84658,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Fig.2.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7220165/v1/d40b2d9a81999a50090f4641.docx"},{"id":93017680,"identity":"1726283f-94aa-4b2e-99c9-7f72dc03b924","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-08 08:17:30","extension":"docx","order_by":3,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":535898,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Fig.3.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7220165/v1/d68772e03b8d5570b166753c.docx"},{"id":93015922,"identity":"1f426809-03b9-4d62-a2d7-b494c1fa59a0","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-08 08:01:29","extension":"docx","order_by":4,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":184025,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Fig.4.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7220165/v1/14b6ddcf68e58390021185aa.docx"},{"id":93015920,"identity":"64e6375e-8b8f-4f7c-9912-68e41f2bbb0f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-08 08:01:29","extension":"docx","order_by":5,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":624673,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Fig.5.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7220165/v1/de07ca603a05736380876e71.docx"},{"id":93015925,"identity":"99d5c59b-4a11-4c76-b47c-12b1b16a3ecd","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-08 08:01:29","extension":"json","order_by":6,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":10168,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"92f66fb0c4364e72886eb0eef79f2c7d.json","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7220165/v1/c7d6dba28494b5664ad1a961.json"},{"id":93017260,"identity":"5825cf44-ceb2-4ef7-a9b7-791efe7ad72a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-08 08:09:29","extension":"xml","order_by":7,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":156050,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"92f66fb0c4364e72886eb0eef79f2c7d1enriched.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7220165/v1/be194c159ab3b6cfc9c68931.xml"},{"id":93015928,"identity":"2cba4392-d03d-4efb-8b14-e1ce6389f7b7","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-08 08:01:29","extension":"xml","order_by":13,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":152479,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"92f66fb0c4364e72886eb0eef79f2c7d1structuring.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7220165/v1/4c20f9290c503828e95cf478.xml"},{"id":93015927,"identity":"7db6d58b-c588-4aa8-9ec9-a2bb79086713","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-08 08:01:29","extension":"html","order_by":14,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":173388,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"earlyproof.html","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7220165/v1/c232ecac7e54ace812331e9c.html"},{"id":93015917,"identity":"a8a157a0-7295-413f-8370-f34554e45512","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-08 08:01:29","extension":"jpeg","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":521725,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"Schematic representation of the study design","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7220165/v1/7d6fff27eb26b5d0ccb8566d.jpeg"},{"id":93017257,"identity":"5c582c0e-4422-432d-9c39-e239f57a5202","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-08 08:09:29","extension":"jpeg","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":463085,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eGenetic organization of carbapenemase-encoding DNA fragments reconstructed from hybrid assemblies.\u003cem\u003e \u003c/em\u003eA) Three\u003cem\u003e Escherichia coli \u003c/em\u003eST 410 strains carrying \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eNDM-5\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e compared to the reference strains AP019191\u003cem\u003e; \u003c/em\u003eB) One\u003cem\u003e Klebsiella pneumoniae \u003c/em\u003eST147 strain carrying\u003cem\u003e bla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eNDM-\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e, compared to reference strain CP050380.1; C) Two\u003cem\u003e Acinetobacter baumannii \u003c/em\u003eST860 strains carrying\u003cem\u003e bla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eNDM-1\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e, compared to reference strain CP091373.1. Insertion sequences and transposases flanking \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003eNDM-1 in \u003cem\u003eA. baumannii\u003c/em\u003e are indicated. Genes with identical functions are color-coded, and black lines between plasmids represent gene-by-gene similarities within and across plasmid clusters.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7220165/v1/881759de80c72ac01557d731.jpeg"},{"id":93015926,"identity":"1ae3faa5-a775-4fbb-9865-220c723b7e2b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-08 08:01:29","extension":"jpeg","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":873738,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eGenetic context of the most common carbapenemase-encoding plasmids reconstructed by hybrid assembly. A) \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e carrying \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003eNDM\u003c/sub\u003e and B) \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e carrying \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003eNDM\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage3.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7220165/v1/824a554b8229b5802ccc0b27.jpeg"},{"id":93015923,"identity":"0c178a6a-2472-4430-8aaf-6225d890ddc8","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-08 08:01:29","extension":"jpeg","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":167858,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eGenomic transmission networks of carbapenemase-producing strains. A) \u003cem\u003eAcinetobacter baumannii\u003c/em\u003e (ST 860) carrying \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eNDM-1 \u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e(three strains); B) \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e (ST147) carrying \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eNDM-1\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003cem\u003e \u003c/em\u003e(eight strains); C) \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli \u003c/em\u003e(ST 410) carrying \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eNDM-5\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003cem\u003e \u003c/em\u003e(four strains); and D) \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli \u003c/em\u003e(ST410) carrying \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eOXA-181\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e (four strains). Strains with ≤30 SNP differences are considered closely related, indicating potential transmission events.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage4.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7220165/v1/11795155a16e2643fac961b6.jpeg"},{"id":93015930,"identity":"81860ff0-cf2c-4458-a10d-3e7de98afe85","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-08 08:01:29","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":608744,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eMidpoint-rooted whole genome-based phylogenetic tree\u003cem\u003e \u003c/em\u003eof carbapenemase-producing strains. A) \u003cem\u003eAcinetobacter baumannii \u003c/em\u003ecarrying \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eNDM-1\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e; B) \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e ST410 carrying \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eNDM-5\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e, and C) \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e ST147 carrying \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eNDM-1\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage5.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7220165/v1/88435d678c750d7688fe9807.png"},{"id":93018946,"identity":"625d7cf3-0878-4d89-a1f1-30025f1d020c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-08 08:25:30","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":3916241,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7220165/v1/96b9baa7-2a01-474c-8832-effe57f11390.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Transmission dynamics of carbapenemase-producing bacteria and mobile genetic elements between hospital and household settings in Benin","fulltext":[{"header":"Background","content":"\u003cp\u003eHospitals serve as hotspots for the emergence and transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs), which can colonize patients before or during hospitalization. This colonization increases the risk of subsequent infections and facilitates the dissemination of antimicrobial resistance into the community post-discharge [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e]. Healthcare workers and the hospital environments contribute to the spread of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, leading to hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e]. Contaminated hands, inadequately disinfected medical instruments, and frequently touched surfaces act as key reservoirs for MDR bacteria, posing risks to patients, staff, and the broader community [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBeyond hospital settings, colonized patients act as reservoirs for for MDROs including carbapenem-resistant bacteria (CRB), facilitating household transmission and sustaining the cycle of spread and infection [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e]. While carbapenemase-producing bacteria have been detected in the community, data on their transmission dynamics and risk factors in household settings remain limited [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e]. Discharged patients and their caregivers, if still colonised, can transmit CRB, particularly in households where close contact is frequent (7). Notably, even short hospital stays (1–5 days) can lead to persistent colonization lasting months or years in the absence of antimicrobial therapy, further increasing the risk of community dissemination [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn West Africa, systematic CRB surveillance is lacking, but regional prevalence averages 4.6%, with reported rates ranging from 1.6–18.6% [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e]. In Benin, CRB prevalence was estimated 8.1% (64/790) in patients, yet comprehensive surveillance systems for HAIs are absent, and data on CRB transmission dynamics remain sparse [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e]. Existing studies in Benin are small-scale and do not examine hospital-to-household transmission of bacterial resistance. Addressing this knowledge gap is essential for designing effective containment strategies in both healthcare and community settings.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study investigates the role of patients and caregivers in CRB transmission from hospitals to households. It further analyses the genetic relatedness of carbapenem-resistant bacterial isolates and identifies mobile genetic elements involved in resistance spread.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Methods","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eStudy design and sampling procedure\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study was conducted from January to March 2023 in five hospitals in Benin. All newly admitted patients in surgical or pediatric wards who provided informed consent were included in the study. These wards were targeted because those patients, children and others with limited mobility capacity, mostly require a caregiver (a relative, who stayed in the patient’s room, assisted with personal care, and prepared meals) to assist them during hospitalization. Patients in other wards or those who refused consent were excluded. Healthcare workers (nurses and medical doctors) directly involved in patient care and consenting relatives in contact with CRB-positive patients or caregivers were also included.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e Rectal swabs were systematically collected from patients, caregivers, and healthcare workers at five time points: on admission (D0), and then every 48 hours (D2, D4, D6, and D8) until discharge. For Patients who tested positive at least once during hospitalization and consented to be followed-up, additional samples were collected at their household level from index patients, caregivers and their household contacts (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). Sampling in the household was conducted over two weeks, with swabs collected on the day of return (D0), 48 hours later (D2), on day 7 (D7), day 9 (D9), and day 14 (D14) post-discharge. All follow-up sampling was performed directly by the research team under strict aseptic conditions.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e Informed written consent was obtained from all participants. The study was approved by the Ethics and Research Committee of the Institute of Applied Biomedical Sciences (CER-ISBA) under reference number 154.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eMicrobiological analysis\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRectal swabs were plated on mSuperCARBATM™ (CHROMagar™, Paris, France) and incubated at 37°C for 18–24 hours. Based on colony color and morphology, distinct bacterial colonies were subcultured on MacConkey agar and incubated under the same conditions, repeating until pure cultures were obtained. A total of 981 samples were collected from 248 participants, yielding 412 pure culture isolates on mSuperCARBATM™ selective media. All isolates underwent species identification using MALDI-TOF and antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) with two carbapenem discs: imipenem (10 µg) and ertapenem (10 µg) following the guidelines of the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e]. At this stage, 141 isolates were found to be resistant to at least one of the tested carbapenems. From this pool, 41 isolates were selected for whole genome sequencing based on species identity, collection time points, and participant origin criteria that could help infer potential transmission events and map possible resistance networks among individuals. These selected isolates were subsequently tested for the carbapenem inactivation method (CIM) using meropenem discs (10 µg) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e] to confirm carbapenemase production prior to sequencing. \u003cem\u003eE. coli\u003c/em\u003e ATCC 29522 served as a negative control, while a clinical strain of \u003cem\u003eE. coli\u003c/em\u003e harboring the \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eNDM−1\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e gene was used as a positive control.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eWhole Genome Sequencing and Bioinformatic Analysis\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDNA was extracted from the isolates using the Qiagen DNeasy kit, following the manufacturer’s instructions. Short-read whole genome sequencing (WGS) was performed on the Illumina NovaSeq platform, as previously described [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e]. Sequence reads were quality-checked with FastQC (v0.11.9) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e], trimmed with Fastq [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e], and assembled using SPAdes (v3.15.5) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e]. The quality of assembled genomes was assessed using QUAST [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e], while taxonomic classification was performed with Kraken2 (v2.14) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e], and cross-verified with GTDB-Tk (v2.4.0) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e]. Multi-locus sequence typing (MLST) was conducted using pubMLST (v.2.23) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e] after species confirmation. Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) genes were identified using Abricate (v1.0.1) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e] with the ResFinder 4.1 [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e] database for acquired resistance, while the web version of ResFinder was used to detect resistance conferred by chromosomal mutations. Plasmid replicons were identified using Abricate with the PlasmidFinder 2.1 database [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor each species group of interest, core-genome SNP-based phylogenetic analysis was conducted to assess genetic relatedness between isolates obtained at hospital and household levels at different type points. We applied a SNP threshold of ≤ 30 SNPs to infer close genetic relatedness and potential transmission events, aligning with thresholds commonly reported in the literature for \u003cem\u003eEnterobacteriaceae\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eAcinetobacter\u003c/em\u003e. Genome alignment and variant calling were performed using Snippy (v4.6.0) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e], followed by recombinant removal with Gubbins (v2.4.1) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e]. Phylogenetic trees were reconstructed using RAxML (v8.2.12) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e] with 200 bootstrap replicates and visualized in iTOL 3 [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAfter initial short-read analysis, six isolates (\u003cem\u003eE\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cem\u003ecoli\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eA. baumannii\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eK. pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e) suspected to be part of a transmission network were selected for long-read sequencing using Oxford Nanopore technology to obtain fully assembled genomes for comprehensive analysis of mobile genetic elements. These isolates originated from both hospital and community settings and were recovered across different time points. Genomic analysis revealed that they shared key genotypic characteristics, including resistance gene profiles, plasmid content, and sequence types, with other isolates suspected to be part of the same transmission cluster. Hybrid assembly and plasmid reconstruction were performed using both long- and short-read data, as previously described [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e]. The genetic context of carbapenemase-encoding genes on the reconstructed plasmids was examined in all complete genomes, with contigs containing these genes following our previously described protocol [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo put our strains into a regional context, (West Africa) phylogenetic analyses were performed focusing on three key species: \u003cem\u003eAcinetobacter baumannii bla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eNDM−1\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e, \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e ST410 \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eNDM−5\u003c/em\u003e,\u003c/sub\u003e and \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e ST147 \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eNDM−5\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e. These strains were compared with publicly available genomes from West Africa, incorporating metadata on country of origin, year of isolation, and sample type to evaluate genetic relatedness and evolutionary trends.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAll bioinformatic analysis was performed using customized scripts on the Danish National Life Science high performance computer cluster, Computerome2.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eDistribution of Carbapenem-Resistant Bacteria across hospital and household setting\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e A total of 248 participants were included in this study comprising 81 index patients (65 admitted to pediatric wards and 16 to surgical wards) and 81 matched caregivers. Additionally, 58 healthcare workers and 28 index household members participated. Combining hospital and household phases of the study, we obtained a total of 412 isolates from the msupercarba plates, with 179 from patients, 140 from caregivers, 50 from healthcare workers and 43 from household members during follow-ups. The presumptive species from the selective plate culturing were \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e (n = 161 isolates), \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e (n = 87 isolates), \u003cem\u003eAcinetobacter baumannii\u003c/em\u003e (n = 58 isolates), \u003cem\u003eStenotrophomonas maltophilia\u003c/em\u003e (n = 47 isolates), \u003cem\u003eEnterobacter cloacae\u003c/em\u003e (n = 28 isolates), \u003cem\u003ePseudomonas putida\u003c/em\u003e (n = 23 isolates), \u003cem\u003eDelftia acidovorans\u003c/em\u003e (n = 6 isolates) and \u003cem\u003eAchromobacter xyloxidans\u003c/em\u003e (n = 2 isolates).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe prevalence of carbapenem-resistant bacteria (CRB) in this study is calculated with the number of isolates that grew on selective CRB plates and confirmed resistant to at least one of the carbapenem drugs tested. CRB colonization was very high in the studied population. A total of 141 isolates were found to be resistant to at least one of the tested carbapenems. The predominant CRB species were \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e (40.42%), \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e (19.14%) and \u003cem\u003eAcinetobacter baumannii\u003c/em\u003e (10. 63%).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003ePrevalence of carbapenem-resistant bacteria colonisation in hospital\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOf the 220 participants enrolled at hospitals, on their day of admission (D0), only 62 remained under follow-up by day 4, as the majority were discharged early. The overall prevalence of CRB at the hospital, increased from 7.3% on D0 to 22.7% by D8 (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). A total of 81 carbapenem resistant isolates were found in samples collecting in hospital setting. The predominant CRB species were \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e (47.03%), \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e (26.04%) and \u003cem\u003eAcinetobacter baumannii\u003c/em\u003e (7.40%).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSpecifically, the prevalence of CRB among patients ranged from 11.11% (9/81) on admission to 26,31% (5/19) by D8 of hospitalization (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). However, in a few instances like on day 6, some patients were unavailable for sampling but were sampled again on day 8 (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). A total of 45 CRB were isolated from patients during hospitalization. The predominant CRB species were \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e (n = 20 isolates), \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e (n = 12 isolates) and \u003cem\u003eAcinetobacter baumannii\u003c/em\u003e (n = 3 isolates).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAmong caregivers CRB colonization evolved from 1.23% (1/81) at admission to 18.75% (3/16) by day 8. Similar to the case of patients, some caregivers skipped sampling on day 6 and were sampled again on day 8 (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). A total of 20 CRB were isolated from caregivers during their stay in hospital. The predominant CRB species were \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e (n = 11 isolates), \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e (n = 4 isolates) and \u003cem\u003eAcinetobacter baumannii\u003c/em\u003e (n = 2 isolates).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe number of sampled healthcare workers dropped over time due to their scheduled shifts. However, based on consistent follow-up of the same healthcare workers that were available from day 0 to day 8, the prevalence of CRB increased from 10.34% (6/58) to 22.22% (2/9) on day 8 (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). A total of 16 CRB were isolated from caregivers during their stay in hospital. The predominant CRB species were \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e (n = 8 isolates), \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e (n = 6 isolates) and \u003cem\u003eAcinetobacter baumannii\u003c/em\u003e (n = 1 isolates).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDistribution of participants carrying confirmed carbapenem-resistant bacteria (CRB) by sampling day at the hospital\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDays\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePatients carrying CRB\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eCaregivers carrying CRB\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHealthcare workers carrying CRB\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eNumber of participants carrying CRB (%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eD0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e9/81\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1/81\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e6/58\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e16/220 (7.3)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eD2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e12/79\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e6/78\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3/47\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e21/204 (10.3)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eD4\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3/22\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3/25\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0/15\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e6/62 (9.7)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eD6\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2/11\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3/11\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0/12\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5/34 (14.7)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eD8\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5/19\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3/16\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2/9\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e10/44 (22.7)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003ePrevalence of carbapenem-resistant bacteria colonisation in household\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAt discharge, 30 patients had tested positive at least once during hospitalization. Of these, 29 patients and 28 household contacts consented to home follow-up. The corresponding 30 caregivers were also included in the household follow-up phase. The overall prevalence of CRB colonization at home on D0 of return was 8% increasing to 57.1% by D14 during the follow-up (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). A total of 60 carbapenem resistant isolates were found in samples collecting in household setting. The species at home were consistent with those that were detected in hospital setting i.e. \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e (30%), \u003cem\u003eAcinetobacter baumannii\u003c/em\u003e (15%) and \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e (8.33%).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSpecifically, the prevalence of CRB among patients at household ranged from 13.79% (4/29) on admission to 40% (2/5) by D14 (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). It is important to note that some patients were unavailable for sampling at certain time points during the 14-day follow-up. A total of 27 CRB were isolated from patients at household. The predominant CRB species were \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e (n = 9 isolates), \u003cem\u003eAcinetobacter baumannii\u003c/em\u003e (n = 5 isolates) and \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e (n = 2 isolates).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAmong caregivers CRB colonization reached 60% (3/5) by day 14. As observed with patients, some caregivers were not available for sampling at certain time points during the 14-day follow-up period (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). A total of 14 CRB were isolated from caregivers at household. The predominant CRB species were \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e (n = 5 isolates), \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e (n = 2 isolates) and \u003cem\u003eAcinetobacter baumannii\u003c/em\u003e (n = 2 isolates).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAt the household level, 10.71% (3/28) of household contacts were already colonized with CRB on the day the index patient or caregiver returned home. This proportion increased to 75% (3/4) by day 14 (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). Among the 25 household members who initially tested negative upon the return of a positive patient or caregiver, 6 became colonized with CRB over time. A total of 19 CRB were isolated from household contact the follow up. The predominant CRB species were \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e (n = 4 isolates), \u003cem\u003eAcinetobacter baumannii\u003c/em\u003e (n = 2 isolates) and \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e (n = 1 isolate).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDistribution of participants carrying carbapenem-resistant bacteria (CRB) by sampling day in households.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDay\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePatients carrying carbapenem resistant bacteria\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePatients Guards carrying carbapenem resistant bacteria\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHousehold contacts carrying carbapenem resistant bacteria (total)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eNumber of participants carrying carbapenem resistant bacteria (total)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eD0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4/29\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0/30\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3/28\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e7/87 = 8%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eD2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e6/16\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4/14\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3/25\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e13/55 = 23.6%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eD7\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5/21\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4/23\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4/21\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e13/65 = 20%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eD9\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1/10\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1/13\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1/5\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3/28 = 10.7%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eD14\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2/5\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3/5\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3/4\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e8/14 = 57.1%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eDistribution of the bacterial species by whole genome sequencing (WGS)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA total of 141 isolates were resistant to one of the carbapenem tested, from which 41 were selected for short-reads WGS to support the clinical study. The selection was made to represent each sampling group and potential species sharing cases identified above. Before sequencing the 41 isolates were further confirmed by meropenem inactivation test and all tested positive. Among sequenced genomes, \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e was the most prevalent species (34.1%, n = 14), followed by \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e (29.3%, n = 12) and \u003cem\u003eAcinetobacter baumannii\u003c/em\u003e (14.6%, n = 6). \u003cem\u003eStenotrophomonas maltophilia\u003c/em\u003e (14.6%, n = 6) were found to be sequenced and were excluded for further analysis.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eDistribution of Resistance genes\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAll sequenced isolates, except \u003cem\u003ePseudomonas putida\u003c/em\u003e, carried at least one carbapenem or cephalosporin resistant genes (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). Among \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e isolates, \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eNDM−5\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e (n = 6) and \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eOXA−181\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e (n = 6) were the most frequently carbapenemase genes. \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e (n = 10) and \u003cem\u003eAcinetobacter baumannii\u003c/em\u003e (n = 5) predominanly harbored \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eNDM−1\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e. The \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eVIM−5\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e gene was found exclusively in \u003cem\u003eAchromobacter xyloxidans\u003c/em\u003e (n = 2). The most commonly detected ESBL gene was \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eCTX−M−15\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e (n = 16).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c9\" colnum=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDistribution of carbapenemase and ESBL resistance genes among sequenced isolates.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBacterial species (n)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003eNDM-1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003eNDM-5\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003eOXA-181\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003eOXA-like\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003eVIM-5\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003eCTX-M-15\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eCMY-2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003eCTX-M-36\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e (14)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e (12)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAcinetobacter baumannii\u003c/em\u003e (6)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAchromobater xylosoxidans\u003c/em\u003e (2)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePseudomonas putida\u003c/em\u003e (1)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eGenetic characteristics of carbapenem-resistant isolates harbouring plasmids\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe most represented sequence types (STs) were \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e ST410 (n = 11) and \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e ST147 (n = 10). Among \u003cem\u003eAcinetobacter baumanii\u003c/em\u003e isolates, ST860 (n = 3) was the most represented lineage (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c9\" colnum=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c10\" colnum=\"10\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDistribution of sequence types among selected sequenced genomes.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"10\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBacterial isolates\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eST410\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eST167\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eST657\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eST147\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eST967\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eST11\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eST860\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eST1463\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eST107\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e (14)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e (12)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAcinetobacter baumannii\u003c/em\u003e (5)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAmong the sequenced isolates, \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e were the only species harboring plasmids. All \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e ST410 (n = 11) isolate harboured the IncFII plasmid type. None \u003cem\u003eAcinetobacter baumanii\u003c/em\u003e isolates carried plasmids (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c9\" colnum=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c10\" colnum=\"10\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab5\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 5\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePlasmid replicons present in selected sequenced genomes.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"10\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIncFII\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIncX3\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIncXI\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIncR\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c7\" namest=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIncFII\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIncFIB\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIncHI1B\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIncL/M\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e (14)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e (12)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eGenetic context of carbapenem resistance genes\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAfter initial short-read analysis, six isolates (\u003cem\u003eE\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cem\u003ecoli\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eA. baumannii\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eK. pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e) suspected to be part of a transmission network were selected for long-read sequencing using Oxford Nanopore technology to obtain fully assembled genomes for comprehensive analysis. These isolates originated from both hospital and community settings and were recovered across multiple time points. Genomic analysis revealed that they shared key genotypic characteristics, including resistance gene profiles, plasmid content, and sequence types, with other isolates suspected to be part of the same transmission cluster.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHybrid assemblies (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e) illustrate the genetic context of carbapenemase genes in \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e (panel a); \u003cem\u003eAcinetobacter baumannii\u003c/em\u003e (panel b) and \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e (panel c). These analyses reveal that plasmids of the same IncF family are responsible for mobilizing \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eNDM\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e genes in \u003cem\u003eE. coli\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eK. pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e isolates from both hospitals and household environments. In \u003cem\u003eAcinetobacter baumanii\u003c/em\u003e, where carbapenem resistance is chromosomally encoded, \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eNDM\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e genes are located within an insertion sequence (IS\u003cem\u003eAba 125\u003c/em\u003e) carrying the composite transposon Tn\u003cem\u003e125\u003c/em\u003e (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, Panel C).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHybrid genome assemblies were further used to reconstruct the genetic context of the two representative carbapenemase-carrying plasmids (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). The predominant plasmid types mediating dissemination in both healthcare and community settings were IncF types (IncFII for \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eNDM−5\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e and IncFI for \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eNDM−1\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e). These carbapenemase genes were concentrated in genome regions co-localized with multiple antimicrobial resistance determinants.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eGenomic transmission networks\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWe reconstructed the transmission networks of carbapenemase-producing bacterial strains identified in this study (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThree \u003cem\u003eAcinetobacter baumannii\u003c/em\u003e ST860 strains carrying the \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eNDM−1\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e gene were isolated from a discharged patient (C22), their caregiver (C26, initially negative upon the patient’s return home), and a household contact (C24, also initially negative) (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003ea). The caregiver and household contact tested positive two days after the index patient’s return. However, SNP analysis (≥ 30) did not confirm their genetic relatedness.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePersistent colonization was observed in patient 3 from hospital admission (Day 0) through Day 14 at home (M33, M50, M51, and M69) (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003eb). Additionally, three \u003cem\u003eK. pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e ST147 isolates were recovered from the patient’s caregiver between Day 2 and Day 14 at home (M34, M53, and M70). SNP analysis revealed ≤ 30 differences between these genomes, indicating a closely related genetic background and suggesting that the strain was introduced into the household by the discharged patient.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA potential transmission event was identified from the caregiver of patient 1 on Day 7 in the hospital (L62) to patient 1 on Day 2 at home after discharge (L71) (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003ec). Core-genome SNP analysis revealed approximately 20 SNP differences, confirming a closely related genetic background and supporting the transmission of \u003cem\u003eE. coli\u003c/em\u003e ST410 from hospital to household.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA potential transmission event of \u003cem\u003eE. coli\u003c/em\u003e ST410 was also observed from the caregiver of patient 3 on Day 4 at home (T18), persisting in the caregiver until Day 9 (T34), and subsequently detected in both patient 3 and their household contact on Day 9 (T33, T34) with ≤ 20 SNP differences (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003ed). Patient 3 was found colonized with this strain on Day 2 of hospitalization, and the isolate was confirmed via long-read sequencing. Given the timeline, this event suggests community-level transmission of a multidrug-resistant clone.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eWhole genome-based phylogenetic tree\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFigure \u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e presents core-genome phylogenetic analyses of \u003cem\u003eAcinetobacter baumannii\u003c/em\u003e (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003ea), \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e ST410 (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003eb), and \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e ST147 (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003ec). These analyses illustrate phylogenetic clustering based on country of origin, year of isolation, and sample type. Newly sequenced strains are compared with publicly available genomes carrying similar genetic markers (\u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eNDM−1\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e or \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eNDM−5\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e), providing insights into their genetic relationships and potential transmission pathways. The blue shading in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e indicates the clade of isolates from this study.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTwo distinct phylogenetic clusters were observed for \u003cem\u003eA. baumannii\u003c/em\u003e carrying \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eNDM−1\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e. One cluster represented strains from Benin, which were genetically distinct from Nigerian isolates, suggesting localized evolutionary divergence (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003ea). These strains were isolated from diverse clinical samples (blood, rectal swabs, and wound samples), indicating a consistent infection source within the region but clear geographical differentiation.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eE. coli\u003c/em\u003e ST410 carrying \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eNDM−5\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e demonstrated phylogenetic closeness between strains from this study and those from Nigeria, forming a tightly clustered lineage (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003eb). This suggests regional dissemination of a shared genetic lineage. Samples were obtained from urine, rectal swabs, and wounds across multiple years (2020–2023), indicating the sustained circulation of this lineage.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eK. pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e ST147 carrying \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eNDM−5\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e formed a distinct cluster positioned between Nigerian and Ghanaian isolates, suggesting intermediate evolutionary traits (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003ec). Compared to older regional isolates, the strains in this study demonstrated closer phylogenetic relationships for strains, indicating potential recent transmission events. \u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe overall prevalence of carbapenem-resistant bacteria (CRB) colonization in the study population was 7.3% at hospital admission (D0), rising to 22.7% by D8. These findings align with studies conducted in Turkey and Kenya, where the prevalence of CRB carriage at admission was 12.5% [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e]. Similarly, in India, 6.6% of hospitalized patients were colonized with carbapenem-resistant bacteria [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e]. However, our results contrast with the significantly higher prevalence (52%) reported among patients in Vietnamese hospitals [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e], which may be attributed to differences in sample size, study design, and local infection control measures. The increasing prevalence of CRB colonization during hospitalization suggests nosocomial transmission, likely facilitated by direct patient-to-patient contact, healthcare worker-to-patient interactions, or contaminated fomites, particularly in settings with suboptimal infection prevention and control practices [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e]. Furthermore, this study observed both acquisition and loss of CRB colonization over time, consistent with previous findings [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e]. In the household setting, CRB colonization was detected in 8% of participants at D0, increasing to 57.1% by D14. This is notably higher than the 14.4% prevalence reported in a community study from Rawalpindi, Pakistan [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e]. These findings suggest that community CRB carriage contributes to resistant strain spread in healthcare, highlighting the need for broader infection control strategies.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBased on presumptive species identification from selective mSuperCarba plates, a diverse range of Gram-negative bacterial species was recovered across hospital and household settings, totaling 412 isolates. The most frequently detected species were \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e (n = 161), \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e (n = 87), and \u003cem\u003eAcinetobacter baumannii\u003c/em\u003e (n = 58). Among the 141 isolates confirmed to be resistant to at least one of the tested carbapenems, the predominant species were \u003cem\u003eE. coli\u003c/em\u003e (40.42%), \u003cem\u003eK. pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e (19.14%), and \u003cem\u003eA. baumannii\u003c/em\u003e (10.63%). These proportions suggest that these three species were the major contributors to carbapenem resistance in the studied population. A subset of 41 isolates comprising predominantly \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e (34.1%), \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e (29.3%), and \u003cem\u003eAcinetobacter baumannii\u003c/em\u003e (14.6%) was selected for whole-genome sequencing. This subset was chosen to facilitate the investigation of potential transmission events and to characterize resistance dissemination networks across hospital and household environments. \u003cem\u003eE. coli\u003c/em\u003e isolates harboring \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003eNDM-5\u003c/sub\u003e and \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003eOXA-181\u003c/sub\u003e were detected for the first time in Benin. The spread of \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003eNDM-5\u003c/sub\u003e and \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003eOXA-181\u003c/sub\u003e-producing \u003cem\u003eE. coli\u003c/em\u003e has also been reported in Chad [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e]. Among \u003cem\u003eK. pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eA. baumannii\u003c/em\u003e isolates, \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003eNDM-1\u003c/sub\u003e was the most frequently detected carbapenemase gene, consistent with findings from South Africa [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e]. Similarly, \u003cem\u003eA. baumannii\u003c/em\u003e producing New Delhi metallo-β-lactamase-1 (NDM-1) had previously been identified in a clinical setting in Benin [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e]. Furthermore, this study is the first to report the presence of the \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003eVIM-5\u003c/sub\u003e gene in \u003cem\u003eAchromobacter xylosoxidans\u003c/em\u003e isolates in Benin. Previously, carbapenem-resistant \u003cem\u003eA. xylosoxidans\u003c/em\u003e carrying the \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003eVIM-2 gene had been reported only in a European setting [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e]. The growing Africa-Europe travel likely spreads resistant strains beyond their original epidemiological contexts.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe transmission networks of carbapenemase-producing bacteria reveal complex dynamics, with both direct and indirect transmission occurring in close-contact settings. While some strains, such as \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e ST147 and \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e ST410, exhibit clear genetic links indicative of household transmission, others, like \u003cem\u003eAcinetobacter baumannii\u003c/em\u003e ST860, show high genetic diversity, suggesting multiple introduction events or independent transmission routes. These findings highlight the importance of genomic surveillance in detecting hidden carbapenem-resistant bacteria transmission, aiding outbreak investigations, and improving infection control [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e37\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eConsistent with previous studies, this study confirms the persistence of colonization by resistant organisms even after patient discharge and highlights the occurrence of transmission in household settings [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e]. The predominance of \u003cem\u003eE. coli\u003c/em\u003e clone ST410 (n = 11) in this study, along with its detection in Ghana, suggests a broader clonal dissemination across West Africa [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e39\u003c/span\u003e]. Among \u003cem\u003eK. pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e isolates, ST147 (n = 10) was the most represented. The spread of NDM-1-producing \u003cem\u003eK. pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e ST147 has also been reported in Tunisian hospitals [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e], emphasizing its potential role in hospital outbreaks in Benin. The widespread distribution of IncF-type plasmids harboring carbapenemase genes among hospitalized patients has been extensively documented [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e41\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e42\u003c/span\u003e]. Previous studies have demonstrated a conserved genetic arrangement among NDM-producing isolates [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e43\u003c/span\u003e], with similar configurations reported across multiple countries and continents. This widespread conservation suggests that these plasmids, particularly in \u003cem\u003eE. coli\u003c/em\u003e, contribute significantly to global antimicrobial resistance and predict resistance to a broad range of antibiotics [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e44\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA major limitation of this study lies in the substantial loss to follow-up, both within the hospital setting and after discharge at the household level. The primary reason for this loss is linked to the structure of patient care in the pediatric ward. Out of 81 patients enrolled, 65 were admitted to the pediatric unit where the average duration of stay was relatively short typically two to three days. As a result, many caregivers and family members who accompanied the children also left shortly after hospital day two. Furthermore, some samples could not be collected during hospitalization due to the patients' clinical conditions, leading to gaps in daily follow-up (for instance Day 6 and Day 8). In this study, Day 0 (D0) in the household context was defined as the day of hospital discharge. On that day, it was relatively easy to collect samples from the patients who had tested positive, as they were still available and accessible. However, follow-up at home proved more challenging. Household-level follow-up was dependent on the availability and willingness of the discharged patient and their household contacts. To mitigate this limitation, the follow-up period was extended from the initially planned 7 days to 14 days, in an attempt to improve the chances of reaching and sampling household contacts. Despite this adjustment, the follow-up coverage remained insufficient, and data completeness was not achieved. Finaly, for the household phase, the study focuses on patient and caregiver transmission, omitting healthcare workers as potential vectors of transmission from heathcare to community settings. This was because we did not have healthcare workers consent to follow them up at household levels and this should be further considered in future studies.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe findings highlight the role of patients in facilitating the spread of carbapenem-resistant bacteria between healthcare settings and the community. Genomic surveillance is crucial to mapping transmission and understanding resistance dynamics. Ongoing monitoring and targeted interventions are important for control and public health.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Abbreviations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAST\u003c/strong\u003e: Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCMY\u003c/strong\u003e: Cephamycinase\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCRB\u003c/strong\u003e: Carbapenem-Resistant Bacteria\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCTX-M\u003c/strong\u003e: Cefotaximase-Munich\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHAIs\u003c/strong\u003e: Hospital-Acquired Infections\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eISAba125\u003c/strong\u003e: Insertion Sequence Aba125\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMDROs\u003c/strong\u003e: Multidrug-Resistant Organisms\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNDM\u003c/strong\u003e: New Delhi Metallo-\u0026beta;-lactamase\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eOxa\u003c/strong\u003e: Oxacillinase\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSTs\u003c/strong\u003e: Sequence Types\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTn125\u003c/strong\u003e: Transposon 125\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVIM\u003c/strong\u003e: Verona Integron-encoded Metallo-\u0026beta;-lactamase\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgments\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to Arielle Kounou, Lydie Comlan, Lidwine Aidodo, Belvida Houndonougbo, Claudiane Adigbonon for their invaluable assistance during the implementation of this study. We also thank all the staff of the participating hospitals for their cooperation and support in ensuring the best possible care for the patients. Lastly, we appreciate the participation of all study participants.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor Contributions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eV.D., Y.M.G.H., and K.S wrote the protocol. K.S., B.L., B.H., K.F and H.K., collected and processed the samples. Y.M.G.H., K.S., B.H and B.L., did the bioinformatics analyses. K.S., Y.M.G.H., V.D., and A.D wrote the draft of the manuscript, Y.M.G.H, V.D and A.D. provided funding.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study received support from existing funding at the University of Copenhagen, including the following projects: The Danish International Development Assistance (DANIDA) funded projects \u0026ldquo;Health and Antibiotics in Vietnamese Pig Production\u0026rdquo; (grant DFC file 17-M06-KU) and \u0026ldquo;Salmonella Control in the Colombian Pig Industry\u0026rdquo; (grant DFC file 18-M07-KU); and the Innovation Fund Denmark (IFD) under the umbrella of the JPIAMR (Joint Programming Initiative on Antimicrobial Resistance, Research Project: 2022-02-15 - 2025-02-14).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData availability\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe sequenced genomes (both Illumina and Nanopore) that support the findings of this study have been deposited in the European Nucleotide Archive under the project accession number PRJEB85980.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthical approval\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eand Consent to Participate\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study was approved by the Ethics and Research Committee of the Institute of Applied Biomedical Sciences (CER-ISBA) under reference number 154. The research work (sampling from hospitalized patients, sample processing and data analysis) in our study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.\u0026nbsp;Written informed consent was obtained from each patient or their parent/guardian before participation, accompanied by a concise explanation of the study\u0026rsquo;s objective. Patients were provided the option to decline participation (opt-out) if they chose.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent to publish\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting Interest\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare no conflict of interest.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTseng WP, Chen YC, Chen SY, Chen SY, Chang SC. Risk for subsequent infection and mortality after hospitalization among patients with multidrug-resistant gram-negative bacteria colonization or infection. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2018;7(1):93. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13756-018-0388-z.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLa Fauci V, Costa GB, Genovese C, Palamara MAR, Alessi V, Squeri R. Drug-resistant bacteria on hands of healthcare workers and in the patient area: an environmental survey in Southern Italy\u0026rsquo;s hospital. Rev Esp Quimioter. 2019;32(4):303‑10.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSuleyman G, Alangaden G, Bardossy AC. The Role of Environmental Contamination in the Transmission of Nosocomial Pathogens and Healthcare-Associated Infections. Curr Infect Dis Rep. 2018;20(6):12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11908-018-0620-2.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOmulo S, Ita T, Mugoh R, Ayodo C, Luvsansharav U, Bollinger S, et al. Risk Factors for Colonization With Extended-Spectrum Cephalosporin-Resistant and Carbapenem-Resistant \u003cem\u003eEnterobacterales\u003c/em\u003e Among Hospitalized Patients in Kenya: An Antibiotic Resistance in Communities and Hospitals (ARCH) Study. Clin Infect Dis. 2023;77:97‑103. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciad258. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRodriguez-Bano J, Lopez-Cerero L, Navarro MD, de Alba PD, Pascual A. Faecal carriage of extended-spectrum \u0026beta;-lactamase-producing \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e: prevalence, risk factors and molecular epidemiology. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2008;62(5):1142‑9. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkn293.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eValverde A, Grill F, Coque TM, Pintado V, Baquero F, Cant\u0026oacute;n R, et al. High rate of intestinal colonization with extended-spectrum-\u0026beta;-lactamase-producing organisms in household contacts of infected community patients. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2008;46(8):2796‑9. https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.01008-08.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHaverkate MR, Platteel TN, Fluit AC, Stuart JC, Leverstein-van Hall MA, Thijsen SF, et al. Quantifying within-household transmission of extended-spectrum \u0026beta;-lactamase-producing bacteria. CMI. 2017;23(1):46-e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2016.08.021.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZahar JR, Lanternier F, Mechai F, Filley F, Taieb F, Mainot EL, et al. Duration of colonisation by \u003cem\u003eEnterobacteriaceae\u003c/em\u003e producing extended-spectrum \u0026beta;-lactamase and risk factors for persistent faecal carriage. JHI. 2010;75(1):76‑8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2009.11.010.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eXu M, Zeng J. Analysis of factors influencing the risk of secondary infection in patients colonized or infected with multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria following hospitalization. Microb. Pathog. 2024;190:106637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micpath.2024.106637.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDossouvi KM, Bakpatina-Batako KD. Carbapenem resistance in West Africa: a systematic review. Microbiol. Indep. Res. J. 2024;11:25‑56. https://doi.org/10.18527/2024112556.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYehouenou C, Nagalo A, Kabore OD, Ouedraogo AS. Perspectives : apport du diagnostic dans la lutte contre la r\u0026eacute;sistance aux antimicrobiens en Afrique de l\u0026rsquo;Ouest. MMI Formation. 2023;2(1):19‑25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mmifmc.2023.01.001-.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEUCAST, Comit\u0026eacute; de l\u0026rsquo;Antibiograme de la Soci\u0026eacute;t\u0026eacute; Fran\u0026ccedil;aise de Microbiologie. Soci\u0026eacute;t\u0026eacute; Fran\u0026ccedil;aise de Microbiologie. 2022; https://www.sfm-microbiologie.org/boutique/comite-de-lantibiograme-de-la-sfm-casfm/. Accessed 4 Jul 2023.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003evan der Zwaluw K, de Haan A, Pluister GN, Bootsma HJ, de Neeling AJ, Schouls LM. The carbapenem inactivation method (CIM), a simple and low-cost alternative for the Carba NP test to assess phenotypic carbapenemase activity in gram-negative rods. PloS one. 2015;10(3):e0123690. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0123690. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHounmanou YMG, Wanyana A, Alafi S, Wabwire-Mangen F, Christensen H, Olsen JE, et al. Whole strains vs MGEs in short and longterm transmission of ESBL genes between healthcare and community settings in Uganda. Sci Rep. 2023;13(1):10229. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-35879-x.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSimon A. Babraham Bioinformatics - FastQC A Quality Control tool for High Throughput Sequence Data. 2010. https://www.bioinformatics.babraham.ac.uk/projects/fastqc/. Accessed 4 Jan 2025.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChen S, Zhou Y, Chen Y, Gu J. fastp: an ultra-fast all-in-one FASTQ preprocessor. Bioinformatics. 2018;34(17):884‑90. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/bty560.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBankevich A, Nurk S, Antipov D, Gurevich AA, Dvorkin M, Kulikov AS, et al. SPAdes: a new genome assembly algorithm and its applications to single-cell sequencing. J Comput Biol. 2012;19(5):455‑77. https://doi.org/10.1089/cmb.2012.0021.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGurevich A, Saveliev V, Vyahhi N, Tesler G. QUAST: quality assessment tool for genome assemblies. Bioinformatics. 2013;29(8):1072‑5. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btt086. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWood DE, Lu J, Langmead B. Improved metagenomic analysis with Kraken 2. Genome Biol. 2019;20(1):257. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-019-1891-0. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChaumeil PA, Mussig AJ, Hugenholtz P, Parks DH. GTDB-Tk v2: memory friendly classification with the genome taxonomy database. Bioinformatics. 2022;38(23):5315‑6. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btac672. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJolley KA, Maiden MCJ. BIGSdb: Scalable analysis of bacterial genome variation at the population level. BMC Bioinformatics. 2010;11:595. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-11-595. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSeemann T. tseemann/abricate. 2025. https://github.com/tseemann/abricate. Accessed 4 Jan 2025.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBortolaia V, Kaas RS, Ruppe E, Roberts MC, Schwarz S, Cattoir V, et al. ResFinder 4.0 for predictions of phenotypes from genotypes. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2020;75(12):3491‑500. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkaa345. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCarattoli A, Zankari E, Garc\u0026iacute;a-Fern\u0026aacute;ndez A, Voldby Larsen M, Lund O, Villa L, et al. In silico detection and typing of plasmids using PlasmidFinder and plasmid multilocus sequence typing. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014;58(7):3895‑903. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSeemann T. tseemann/snippy. 2025. Available: https://github.com/tseemann/snippy. Accessed 4 Jan 2025.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCroucher NJ, Page AJ, Connor TR, Delaney AJ, Keane JA, Bentley SD, et al. Rapid phylogenetic analysis of large samples of recombinant bacterial whole genome sequences using Gubbins. Nucleic Acids Res. 2015;43(3):15. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gku1196. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eStamatakis A. RAxML version 8: a tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies. Bioinformatics. 2014;30(9):1312‑3. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btu033. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLetunic I, Bork P. Interactive tree of life (iTOL) v3: an online tool for the display and annotation of phylogenetic and other trees. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016;44(1):242-245. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkw290. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKizilates F, Yakupogullari Y, Berk H, Oztoprak N, Otlu B. Risk factors for fecal carriage of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing and carbapenem-resistant \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e strains among patients at hospital admission. Am.J.Infect.Control. 2021;49(3):333‑9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2020.07.035 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMittal G, Gaind R, Kumar D, Kaushik G, Gupta KB, Verma PK, et al. Risk factors for fecal carriage of carbapenemase producing \u003cem\u003eEnterobacteriaceae\u003c/em\u003e among intensive care unit patients from a tertiary care center in India. BMC Microbiol. 2016;16(1):1‑10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12866-016-0763-y \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTran DM, Larsson M, Olson L, Hoang NTB, Le NK, Khu DTK, et al. High prevalence of colonisation with carbapenem-resistant \u003cem\u003eEnterobacteriaceae\u003c/em\u003e among patients admitted to Vietnamese hospitals: Risk factors and burden of disease. J Infect. 2019;79(2):115‑22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2019.05.013. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRodr\u0026iacute;guez-Villodres \u0026Aacute;, Mart\u0026iacute;n-Gandul C, Pe\u0026ntilde;alva G, Guisado-Gil AB, Crespo-Rivas JC, Pach\u0026oacute;n-Ib\u0026aacute;\u0026ntilde;ez ME, et al. Prevalence and Risk Factors for Multidrug-Resistant Organisms Colonization in Long-Term Care Facilities Around the World: A Review. Antibiotics. 2021;10(6):680. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics10060680. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHabib A, Lo S, Villageois-Tran K, Petitjean M, Malik SA, Armand-Lef\u0026egrave;vre L, Rupp\u0026eacute; E, Zahra R. Dissemination of carbapenemase-producing \u003cem\u003eEnterobacterales\u003c/em\u003e in the community of Rawalpindi, Pakistan. PLoS One. 2022 8;17(7):e0270707. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0270707. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOuchar Mahamat O, Lounnas M, Hide M, Tidjani A, Benavides J, Diack A, et al. Spread of NDM-5 and OXA-181 Carbapenemase-Producing \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e in Chad. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2019;63(11): e00646-19. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.00646-19. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePerovic O, Britz E, Chetty V, Singh-Moodley A. Molecular detection of carbapenemase-producing genes in referral \u003cem\u003eEnterobacteriaceae\u003c/em\u003e in South Africa: A short report. S Afr Med J. 2016;106(10):975. https://doi.org/10.7196/samj.2016.v106i10.11300. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYehouenou C, Bogaerts B, Vanneste K, Roosens NH, De Keersmaecker SC, Marchal K, et al. First detection of a plasmid-encoded New-Delhi metallo-beta-lactamase-1 (NDM-1) producing \u003cem\u003eAcinetobacter baumannii\u003c/em\u003e using whole genome sequencing, isolated in a clinical setting in Benin. Ann. clin. microbiol. antimicrob. 2021;20(1):1‑7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12941-020-00411-w.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSofianou D, Markogiannakis A, Metzidie E, Pournaras S, Tsakris A. VIM-2 metallo-\u0026beta;-lactamase in Achromobacter xylosoxidans in Europe. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2005;24(12):854‑5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10096-005-0054-2.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSherry NL, Gorrie CL, Kwong JC, Higgs C, Stuart RL, Marshall C, et al. Multi-site implementation of whole genome sequencing for hospital infection control: A prospective genomic epidemiological analysis. Lancet Reg. Health West. Pac. 2022; 23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lanwpc.2022.100446. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTop J, Verschuuren TD, Viveen MC, Riccio ME, Harbarth S, Kluytmans JAJW, et al. Gut microbiome dynamics in index patients colonized with extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing \u003cem\u003eEnterobacterales\u003c/em\u003e after hospital discharge and their household contacts. Microbiol. Spectr. 2023;11(6):e01275-23. https://doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.01275-23. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMahazu S, Prah I, Ayibieke A, Sato W, Hayashi T, Suzuki T, et al. Possible Dissemination of \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e Sequence Type 410 Closely Related to B4/H24RxC in Ghana. Front Microbiol. 2021;12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2021.770130. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMessaoudi A, Haenni M, Mansour W, Saras E, Bel Haj Khalifa A, Chaouch C, et al. ST147 NDM-1-producing \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e spread in two Tunisian hospitals. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2017;72(1):315‑6. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkw401.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOliveira \u0026Eacute;M de, Beltr\u0026atilde;o EMB, Scavuzzi AML, Barros JF, Lopes ACS. High plasmid variability, and the presence of IncFIB, IncQ, IncA/C, IncHI1B, and IncL/M in clinical isolates of \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e with \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e \u003csub\u003eKPC\u003c/sub\u003e and \u003cem\u003ebla\u003c/em\u003e \u003csub\u003eNDM\u003c/sub\u003e from patients at a public hospital in Brazil. Rev Soc Bras Med Trop. 2020;53:e20200397. https://doi.org/10.1590/0037-8682-0397-2020. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTurton JF, Pike R, Perry C, Jenkins C, Turton JA, Meunier D, et al. Wide distribution of \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e carrying IncF plasmids containing \u003cem\u003ebla NDM-5\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003ermtB\u003c/em\u003e resistance genes from hospitalized patients in England. J. Med. Microbiol. 2022;71(8). https://doi.org/10.1099/jmm.0.001569. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEger E, Heiden SE, Korolew K, Bayingana C, Ndoli JM, Sendegeya A, et al. Circulation of Extended-Spectrum Beta-Lactamase-Producing \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e of Pandemic Sequence Types 131, 648, and 410 Among Hospitalized Patients, Caregivers, and the Community in Rwanda. Front Microbiol. 2021;12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2021.662575. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"antimicrobial-resistance-and-infection-control","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"aric","sideBox":"Learn more about [Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control](http://aricjournal.biomedcentral.com/)","snPcode":"13756","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/13756/3","title":"Antimicrobial Resistance \u0026 Infection Control","twitterHandle":"@ARICJournal","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"BMC/SO AJ","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Carbapenemase producing bacteria, Healthcare, Community, Benin","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7220165/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7220165/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003ch2\u003eBackground\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003ePatients can acquire resistance to critical carbapenemase-producing bacteria during hospitalization and may transmit them to household contacts after discharge. The present study aimed to assess the transmission of carbapenemase-producing bacteria from hospitals to households through patients and their caregivers.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eMethods\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eA total of 248 participants were included in this study across 5 hospitals, comprising 81 index patients, 81 caregivers, 58 healthcare workers, and 28 household members. Rectal swabs samples were collected from the participants from admission to discharge and during follow-up at home. Samples were plated on mSuperCARBA\u0026trade;, and obtained isolates were tested for carbapenem resistance. A subset of 41 carbapenem resistant isolates were selected and subjected to Whole Genome Sequencing (WGS) and hybrid assembly analysis to determine genetic relatedness and resistance determinants across sampling networks.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eResults\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eA total of 412 isolates were recovered from hospital and household settings. Among these, 141 isolates were resistant to carbapenem, predominantly \u003cem\u003eE. coli\u003c/em\u003e (40.42%), \u003cem\u003eK. pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e (19.14%), and \u003cem\u003eA. baumannii\u003c/em\u003e (10.63%). For those enrolled at hospital, the prevalence of carbapenem-resistant bacterial colonization increased from 7.3% (16/220) at admission to 22.7% (10/44) by day 8 of hospitalization. Among patients or caregivers that were still positive at discharge, the prevalence at home rose from 8.0% (7/87) on day 0 of discharge to 57.1% (8/14) by day 14 of follow-up. Long- and short-read sequencing identified the carbapenem resistance genes \u003cem\u003eblaNDM-5\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eblaNDM-1\u003c/em\u003e as the main determinants found in \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e ST410 and \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e ST147, respectively. Several strains, including \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e (ST147) and \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e (ST410), showed genetic relatedness and potential transmission within households and between healthcare and home settings. \u003cem\u003eInc\u003c/em\u003eFII and \u003cem\u003eInc\u003c/em\u003eFI conjugative plasmids carried most carbapenemase genes in healthcare and community settings representing another layer of resistance spread via horizontal gene transfer.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eConclusion\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study reveals, for the first time in Benin, the role of patients and their caregivers in facilitating the spread of antimicrobial resistance between hospitals and the community.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Transmission dynamics of carbapenemase-producing bacteria and mobile genetic elements between hospital and household settings in Benin","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-10-08 08:01:24","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7220165/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2026-02-12T19:15:45+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-01-16T21:16:32+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-01-16T18:22:00+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-01-13T09:04:27+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"201915787726458755247430492387318847768","date":"2026-01-09T02:26:33+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-01-07T21:14:23+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"169172754422065715061830217303415538197","date":"2026-01-03T22:59:10+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"72727329602663072740314884241676605670","date":"2026-01-02T13:31:45+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"86078646277108092037480838880156518849","date":"2026-01-02T08:17:37+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"321587531312275857104371022435154794128","date":"2026-01-02T05:16:39+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"208265789872348008412988296007988476427","date":"2026-01-01T21:18:50+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"34690475160089489392016679695395514807","date":"2025-10-21T04:16:45+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2025-09-25T04:03:33+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2025-07-30T07:59:20+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2025-07-30T07:57:14+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Antimicrobial Resistance \u0026 Infection Control","date":"2025-07-26T09:26:59+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"antimicrobial-resistance-and-infection-control","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"aric","sideBox":"Learn more about [Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control](http://aricjournal.biomedcentral.com/)","snPcode":"13756","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/13756/3","title":"Antimicrobial Resistance \u0026 Infection Control","twitterHandle":"@ARICJournal","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"BMC/SO AJ","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"917fb5a3-c615-4849-b78b-c36eccb12c39","owner":[],"postedDate":"October 8th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-04-10T19:53:11+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-10-08 08:01:24","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7220165","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7220165","identity":"rs-7220165","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}