Next Article in Journal
Antibiotic Use in Pregnancy: A Global Survey on Antibiotic Prescription Practices in Antenatal Care
Previous Article in Journal
Assessing the Antimicrobial Properties of Honey Protein Components through In Silico Comparative Peptide Composition and Distribution Analysis
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Antibiotics
Volume 12
Issue 5
10.3390/antibiotics12050829
antibiotics-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Prevalence of Antibiotic-Resistant Seafood-Borne Pathogens in Retail Seafood Sold in Malaysia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

by
Omowale A. Odeyemi
1,2,
Muhamad Amin
3,
Fera R. Dewi
4,
Nor Azman Kasan
5,
Helen Onyeaka
6,
Deyan Stratev
7 and
Olumide A. Odeyemi
3,6,8,*
1
Centre for Child & Adolescent Mental Health (CCAMH), University of Ibadan, Ibadan North, Nigeria
2
School of Nursing, Obafemi Awolowo University Teaching Hospital Complex, Ile Ife, Nigeria
3
Department of Aquaculture, Faculty of Fisheries and Marine, Universitas Airlangga, Jl. Mulyosari, Surabaya 60113, Indonesia
4
Research Centre for Applied Microbiology, National Research and Innovation Agency (BRIN), Cibinong 16911, Indonesia
5
Higher Institution Centre of Excellence (HiCoE), Institute of Tropical Aquaculture and Fisheries, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, Kuala Terengganu 21030, Malaysia
6
HeTA Centre of Excellence for Food Safety, School of Chemical Engineering, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2SQ, UK
7
Department of Food Quality and Safety and Veterinary Legislation, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Trakia University, 6000 Stara Zagora, Bulgaria
8
Office of Research Services, Research Division, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001, Australia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Antibiotics 2023, 12(5), 829; https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics12050829
Submission received: 8 March 2023 / Revised: 25 April 2023 / Accepted: 25 April 2023 / Published: 28 April 2023
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The objective of this study was to examine the frequency and extent of antibiotic-resistant pathogens in seafood sold in Malaysia, using a systematic review and meta-analysis approach to analyze primary research studies. Four bibliographic databases were systematically searched for primary studies on occurrence. Meta-analysis using a random-effect model was used to understand the prevalence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in retail seafood sold in Malaysia. A total of 1938 primary studies were initially identified, among which 13 met the inclusion criteria. In the included primary studies, a total of 2281 seafoods were analyzed for the presence of antibiotic-resistant seafood-borne pathogens. It was observed that 51% (1168/2281) of the seafood was contaminated with pathogens. Overall, the prevalence of antibiotic-resistant seafood-borne pathogens in retail seafood was 55.7% (95% CI: 0.46–0.65). Antibiotic-resistant Salmonella species had an overall prevalence of 59.9% (95% CI: 0.32–0.82) in fish, Vibrio species had an overall prevalence of 67.2% (95% CI: 0.22–0.94) in cephalopods, and MRSA had an overall prevalence of 70.9% (95% CI: 0.36–0.92) in mollusks. It could be concluded that there is a high prevalence of antibiotic-resistant seafood-borne pathogens in the retail seafood sold in Malaysia, which could be of public health importance. Therefore, there is a need for proactive steps to be taken by all stakeholders to reduce the widespread transmission of antibiotic-resistant pathogens from seafood to humans.

1. Introduction

Fish, mollusks, crustaceans, and cephalopods have been reported to be healthy diets due to the high polyunsaturated fatty acids and essential trace elements [1,2]. As a result, many coastal countries have encouraged seafood farming to meet local and international needs.
Contaminated seafood could be a source of pathogens. Similarly, pathogen-harboring seafood could be rejected when exported. For example, Malaysia was one of the countries that had their seafood and seafood products seized by European countries due to the presence of antibiotics [3]. In a recent study, Malaysia was identified as one of the four countries (Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam, and Indonesia) from Southeast Asia that had their seafood products rejected by 19 European countries due to pathogens from 1997 to 2020 [4]. Seafood-borne pathogens and antibiotic resistance [5] are considered global health problems as they threaten food security and global health [6]. In Europe, antibiotic-resistant pathogens have been reported to be responsible for more than 30,000 deaths yearly [7]. It was also predicted that by 2050, antibiotic-resistant pathogens might cause 10 million deaths per year globally and this could potentially cause a reduction of 2% to 5% (USD ~100 trillion) in gross domestic product [7]. In Malaysia, various studies have reported the incidence of seafood-borne pathogens. However, the pool prevalence estimate, the diversity of antibiotic-resistant seafood-borne pathogens, and the antibiotics that the pathogens are resistant to are not yet known. The use of systematic review and meta-analysis could help to pool the results of these studies.
Over the years, there has been an increase in the use of systematic review and meta-analysis to understand the overall prevalence of food-borne pathogens [8,9,10,11,12,13]. While a systematic review is used to synthesize evidence, meta-analysis is a quantitative statistical technique to summarize extracted data from primary studies. Both methods are combined to provide robust evidence that can help different stakeholders make informed decisions.
To the best of our knowledge, no systematic review or meta-analysis have been conducted to understand the overall prevalence of antibiotic-resistant seafood-borne pathogens in retail seafood sold in Malaysia. This study therefore aimed to synthesize evidence and summarize primary studies to describe the prevalence of antibiotic-resistant seafood-borne pathogens in retail seafood sold in Malaysia.

2. Results

2.1. Literature Search and Eligible Studies

Thirteen primary studies (Figure 1) met this study’s inclusion and exclusion criteria. In the primary studies, a total of 2281 retail seafoods were analyzed for the presence of antibiotic-resistant seafood-borne pathogens in retail seafood in Malaysia. As shown in Figure 2A–C, half of the studies (52%) were carried out in Selangor and 57% of the retail seafood was obtained from wet markets, while cephalopods were the least investigated retail seafood. It was observed that 51% (1168/2281) of the seafood was contaminated with pathogens. The results of the meta-analysis of the overall prevalence of pathogens are presented in Table 1.

2.2. Retail Samples Analyzed

Figure 3A–C shows the types of retail seafood that were investigated for the presence of antibiotic-resistant seafood-borne pathogens.

2.2.1. Fish

A total of 781 retail fish including tilapia, catfish, mackerel, and herring were investigated by five studies (2, 4, 7, 8, and 9) for the presence of antibiotic-resistant seafood-borne pathogens. The distributions of the fish samples that were positive for pathogens are shown in Figure 4A.

2.2.2. Mollusks

A total of 754 mollusk samples comprising cockles, mussels, crabs, and snails were analyzed by 7 primary studies (1, 3, 5, 10, 11, 12, and 13) for the presence of antibiotic-resistant seafood-borne pathogens. The distribution of the mollusk samples is shown in Figure 4B. Cockles/clams comprised 49% of the positive samples. Primary study 5 analyzed the highest (49.7%) number of samples, with 60% positive samples. The least analyzed mollusk was the mussel (1%).

2.2.3. Crustaceans

A total of 711 crustacean samples comprising prawn and shrimp were analyzed by 4 primary studies (3, 6, 12, and 13) for the presence of antibiotic-resistant seafood-borne pathogens. The distribution of the crustaceans is shown in Figure 4C.

2.2.4. Cephalopods

A total of 35 cephalopod samples comprising squid were analyzed by primary study 13 for the presence of antibiotic-resistant seafood-borne pathogens. The distribution of the cephalopod samples is shown in Figure 4D.

2.3. Pathogens

The overall prevalence of antibiotic-resistance seafood-borne pathogens in retail seafood in Malaysia is shown in Table 1.

2.3.1. Fish

It was observed that 70% (550/781) of the fish samples were contaminated with Aeromonas sp., Salmonella sp., and Vibrio sp., while 303 confirmed isolates of Salmonella sp. (4%), Aeromonas sp. (19%), and Vibrio (77%) were reported in the 550 positive fish samples, as shown in Figure 5. A total of 57 Aeromonas (primary study 2) isolates comprising Aeromonas hydrophila, Aaeromonas veronii biovar sobria, and Aeromonas caviae were reported by primary study 2 (Figure 6A). A. veronii biovar sobria was more prevalent (84%) in the fish samples. For example, tilapia had 18/48 of A. veronii biovar sobria. The least represented Aeromonas species (A. caviae) was from the northern red snapper fish. A total of 11 confirmed isolates of Salmonella from primary study 4 (7 isolates), namely Salmonella serotype Agona, Salmonella serotype Albany, Salmonella serotype Corvallis, and Salmonella serotype Typhimurium, were reported (Figure 6B). It was observed that S. Corvallis was more prevalent (71%) in catfish (Clarias gariepinus) than in other fish samples. A total of 235 Vibrio parahaemolyticus from tilapia (Oreochromis spp.), catfish (Clarias batrachus), Indian mackerel (Rastrelliger kanagurta), and short mackerel (Rastrelliger branchysoma) were reported by primary studies 8 and 9 (Figure 6C).

2.3.2. Mollusks

It was observed that 44.6% (336/754) of the mollusk samples were contaminated with Vibrio and MRSA (Figure 7).
A total of 384 confirmed isolates of Vibrio and MRSA were reported in the 336 positive mollusk samples. The number of pathogens was more than the positive samples because, in some of the studies, the different parts of the positive samples were analyzed. A total of 378 Vibrio isolates comprising V. parahaemolyticus, Vibrio vulnificus, and Vibrio cholerae were reported by 6 primary studies (primary studies 1, 3, 5, 11, 12, and 13). V. parahaemolyticus was isolated from cockles, crabs, and snails (Figure 8A). However, this pathogen was prevalent (88%) in cockles. The least common Vibrio species (V. cholera) was from the cockles. A total of 7 MRSA isolates from blood cockles/clams (Anadara granosa) and green mussels were reported by study 10 (Figure 8B).

2.3.3. Crustaceans

It was observed that 37% (254/711) of the crustaceans were contaminated with Vibrio species. A total of 252 Vibrio isolates comprising V. parahaemolyticus and V. cholerae were confirmed and reported in primary study 2. V. parahaemolyticus was more prevalent (96%) in the crustacean samples (Figure 9) than V. cholerae.

2.3.4. Cephalopods

It was observed that 80% (28/35) of the squids analyzed were contaminated by V. parahaemolyticus and a total of 28 confirmed isolates of the pathogen were reported.

2.4. Antibiotic Resistance

A total of 172 antibiotics were tested in all the studies. However, after deduplication, 46 unique antibiotics were identified (Table 2). The most tested antibiotics in the primary studies were Tetracycline and Chloramphenicol (92%), while 10 (77%) of the primary studies tested Ampicillin and Gentamicin, respectively. The results of the meta-analysis of the overall prevalence of antibiotic resistance based on the types of seafood and pathogens are presented in Table 3.

2.4.1. Fish

Overall, Aeromonas species were resistant to 93% (14/15) of antibiotics tested (Supplementary File S1A-Fish). The Aeromonas species were resistant to Ampicillin (100%), Carbenicillin 96% (55/57), and Erythromycin 95% (54/57). The pathogen was least resistant to Chloramphenicol (5.26%). Salmonella species were resistant to 46% (6/13) of the antibiotics tested and were more resistant to Clindamycin 100% (11/11) and Rifampicin 100% (11/11), but least resistant to Spectinomycin 27%. Vibrio species were resistant to 86% (19/22) of the antibiotics tested. Vibrio species were more resistant to Ampicillin (85.11%; 200/235), Amikacin (51.49%; 87/235), and Penicillin G (38.72%; 28/235), but least resistant to Doxycycline and Levofloxacin (0.85%; 2/235).

2.4.2. Mollusks

The Vibrio species were resistant to 94% (29/31) of antibiotics tested (Supplementary File S1B-Mollusk). The Vibrio species were more resistant to Ampicillin (88%) and least resistant to Amoxicilin-clavulanic acid (0.26%), while MRSA was resistant to 24% (4/17) of the antibiotics tested. MRSA was 100% resistant to Penicillin G and least resistant (28.57%) to Cefepime.

2.4.3. Crustaceans

The V. parahaemolyticus from red prawn were resistant to 10 antibiotics, while isolates from banana prawn were resistant to all the 14 antibiotics tested. It was observed that 79% (77/97) of the isolates from red prawn and 84% (74/88) of the isolates from banana prawn were resistant to Ampicillin, while Vibrio species isolated from red prawn were least resistant (1.03%) to Imipenem and Gentamicin, and isolates from banana prawn were least resistant (3.41%) to Ampicillin-sulbactam, Gentamicin, and Imipenem (Supplementary File S1C-Crustaceans).

2.4.4. Cephalopods

The 28 V. parahaemolyticus isolates from squids were resistant to 54% (13/24) of the antibiotics tested. It was observed that 96% of the pathogens were resistant to Penicillin G, 79% resistant to Ampicillin and Cefazolin, while the least resistance (4%) was to Cefotaxime and Ceftazidime (Supplementary File S1D-Cephalopod).

3. Discussion

A systematic review is used to synthesize the results of various primary studies, while the meta-analysis is used for the statistical analysis of the results derived from the primary studies [27]. Systematic reviews and meta-analysis are often combined to develop an unbiased assessment of available data [28]. Systematic reviews are important tools for decision-makers to summarize and synthetize the available evidence on a topic of interest [29]. In this study, we combined systematic review and meta-analysis on the occurrence and prevalence of antibiotic-resistant seafood-borne pathogens in retail seafood sold in Malaysia.
Research outputs are mostly published as journal articles that are housed in bibliographic databases. The most popular search databases are PubMed, Web of Science, Science Direct, and Scopus [30]. In this study, we used these databases and obtained thirteen studies which met our inclusion criteria. Half of the included primary studies were published by a public university—the University of Putra Malaysia in Selangor. It was not surprising that the University of Putra Malaysia published half of research outputs involving antibiotic-resistant seafood-borne pathogens in retail seafood sold in Malaysia. The Malaysian National Higher Education Strategic Plan Beyond 2020 structured all the twenty public universities into three categories, namely research universities, comprehensive universities, or focused universities [31]. The University of Putra Malaysia is one of the five research universities [32], and therefore, the university is expected to produce more research outputs. The retail seafood investigated mainly comprised fish, mollusks and crustaceans obtained from wet markets and supermarkets. Bivalve mollusks, shrimps, giant tiger prawns, and marine fish comprise the major seafood of aquaculture sector in Malaysia [33].
In a recent study, Malaysia was identified as one of the four countries (Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam, and Indonesia) from Southeast Asia that had their seafood products rejected by 19 European countries due to the presence of pathogens from 1997 to 2020 [4]. Guardone el al. [3] also reported Malaysia as one of the countries that had their seafood and seafood products seized by European countries due to the presence of antibiotics. While various studies have been conducted in Malaysia examining the presence of antibiotic-resistant seafood-borne pathogens in seafood, there was a dearth of studies on the overall prevalence of the pathogens and the types of antibiotics the pathogens are resistant to Pigłowski [34] reported the presence of Vibrio in seafood imported from Malaysia from 2001 to 2004. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the occurrence and prevalence of antibiotic-resistant seafood-borne pathogens in retail seafood sold in Malaysia, through a systematic review and meta-analysis of 13 primary studies from 1993 to 2021.
In the primary studies included in this current study, a total of 2281 seafood samples were analyzed for the occurrence of antibiotic-resistant seafood-borne pathogens. More than 50% of the samples were contaminated by antibiotic-resistant seafood-borne pathogens. The results of this study indicated the overall prevalence of antibiotic-resistant pathogens in retail seafood in Malaysia to be 55.7% (95% CI: 0.46–0.65). Our study showed that antibiotic-resistant Salmonella had an overall prevalence of 59.9% (95% CI: 0.32–0.82) in fish. Although Salmonella is not a typical aquatic organism, it is one of the most frequent pathogens causing gastroenteritis in people [35]. Production-related hygiene problems have been identified as the main cause of the prevalence of Salmonella in aquaculture environments and seafood products [36,37]. Novoslavskij et al. [38] found that Salmonella was prevalent in seafood products, especially fish, and the frequent serotypes recovered from seafood were S. enterica serovar Typhimurium, ser. Enteritidis, ser. Typhi, ser. Paratyphi B, and ser. Newport. S. Typhimurium and Enteritidis serotypes of S. enterica were predominant in human cases, while Paratyphi B and Typhi were as a result of contamination during handling of samples [38,39]. Ponce et al. [40] reported that Salmonella serovar Typhimurium is a frequent and increasing cause of human infection and is the predominant serovar in Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam. In a study by Hatha and Lakshmanaperumalsamy [41], 14 out of the 18 fish samples were Salmonella-positive. The highest incidence was seen in fish samples from the genera Mugilidae 21/86 (24.4%), Scopelidae 7/25 (28%), and Trachnidae 7/26 (26.9%). The authors suggested that Salmonella may grow more readily in certain types of fish due to high lipid content. Budiati et al. [37] studied the presence of pathogens in freshly caught and retail tilapia (T. mossambica) and catfish (C. gariepinus). The study showed that S. enterica serovars (Agona, Bovismorbificans, Corvallis, Typhimurium) and Albany, Agona, Corvallis, Stanley, and Typhimurium were highly prevalent, with 32/14 (43.8%) and 32/9 (28.1%). Several studies, including [39,42,43,44] and [45], have found Salmonella to be a pathogen with a high prevalence in fish. Both live and caught fish can be impacted by the presence of Salmonella due to the use of contaminated water, improper feeding techniques, contaminated feed, and unhygienic fish catch, handling, and shipping practices [38].
In cephalopods, Vibrio species were found to have an overall prevalence rate of 67.2% (95% CI: 0.22–0.94). Vibrio spp. can naturally be found in freshwater, estuarine, and marine habitats [10]. Vibrio spp. can cause cholera, septicemia, and gastroenteritis [46]. V. parahaemolyticus, V. vulnificus, and V. mimicus are examples of seafood-borne pathogens [47].
In mollusks, 384 confirmed isolates of Vibrio and MRSA were reported in the 336 positive samples, and six studies reported a total of 378 Vibrio isolates comprising V. parahaemolyticus, V. vulnificus, and V. cholerae. A recent study by Haifa-Haryani et al. [48] found 225 Vibrio spp. in cultured shrimp, with V. parahaemolyticus being the most prevalent species, isolated from 6 sampling locations. Seafood, particularly shellfish and bivalve mollusks, are common sources of V. parahaemolyticus worldwide. In our study, we found that 44.6% (336/754) of mollusk samples were contaminated with Vibrio and MRSA (Figure 7). This was similar to a study by Letchumanan et al. [49] that reported the prevalence of V. parahaemolyticus in retail seafood sold in Malaysia. Studies from other countries have also shown the presence of V. parahaemolyticus in fish, shrimp, and bivalve mollusks in Croatia (9.4%) [50], Sri Lanka (98%), Ecuador (81%), and Egypt (18%) [51,52,53]. Other studies have also reported that 24.2% of raw bivalve mollusk samples were positive for V. parahaemolyticus [2]. The prevalence of Vibrio in fish from Greece and Portugal was also reported [54,55]. Similarly, a study showed that most V. parahaemolyticus isolates in the Netherlands were isolated from clams, mussels, and oysters [2]. Similarly, a study conducted in other European countries found that V. parahaemolyticus primarily affected oysters (42.2%), mussels (33.1%), and clams (24.7%) [56]. This pathogen has been detected in the marine waters of several European nations, including Great Britain, France, Spain, Italy, and Slovenia [57,58]. Although V. parahaemolyticus is frequently associated with mollusks, it is also highly prevalent in fish, particularly in Asian countries [59]. The European Union currently does not have a microbiological standard for raw bivalve mollusks with regards to V. parahaemolyticus; however, it is recommended that mollusks taken from water contaminated with Vibrio sp. be tested for the presence of V. parahaemolyticus [54].
It is difficult to attribute antibiotic resistance in fish farms solely to human activity, as bidirectional flow of antimicrobial-resistant bacteria and genes can occur between the marine environment and human microbiota [60]. The Aeromonas species in this current study showed high resistance to 93% (14/15) of the antibiotics tested in the primary studies, with Ampicillin (100%), Carbenicillin (96%, 55/57), and Erythromycin (95%, 54/57) being the most resisted, while Chloramphenicol was the least resisted antibiotic (5.26%). Schar et al. [61] found that seafood-borne pathogens, including Vibrio and Aeromonas spp., had high rates of resistance to first-line antimicrobial classes and moderate-to-high rates of resistance to antimicrobial classes of last resort. Aeromonas spp. isolates from Western and Southern Asia have high levels of resistance to tetracycline, sulfonamide, aminoglycoside, monobactam, carbapenem, and cephalosporin antibiotics. This indicates that therapeutic options for controlling invasive or non-self-limiting Aeromonas infections may already be limited in this subregion compared to areas with lower resistance profiles [62,63]. The use of antibiotics in aquaculture practice could increase the resistance of seafood-borne pathogens to antibiotics [64].

4. Materials and Methods

This study was designed and carried out in six stages following a modified method of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses—PRIMA [11]. The stages are defining key terms, developing the research questions, identifying relevant studies, study selection, data extraction, and data analysis.

4.1. Stage 1: Definition of Terms

As used in this study, incidence is defined as the presence or occurrence of seafood-borne pathogens in retail seafood sold in Malaysia as reported in the primary studies [10]. Primary studies are the studies carried out by other researchers to collect the primary data that were used in this study. These primary studies have therefore already been published in referred journals. The primary studies involve collecting samples of retail seafood, transporting them to the laboratory, and analyzing them for the presence (incidence) and prevalence of antibiotic-resistant seafood-borne pathogens. Prevalence is the rate of occurrence of the pathogens in the samples analyzed from the sample population [10]. Population as used in this study was the various seafood samples investigated in the primary studies. In Malaysia, seafood can be purchased from the hypermarket, supermarket, or wet markets as live or dead aquatic animals. Hypermarkets are retailers of fast consumers goods and basic household needs such food, vegetables, and seafood within different sections [65]. This is similar to a supermarket with slight differences. In supermarkets, there could be the sale of items such as clothing and electrical products in addition to the sale of basic household needs such as food. Both hypermarkets and supermarkets operate every day. On the other hand, in a wet market, consumable goods are sold weekly, and this involves farmers bringing their produce, including seafood, directly from the farm for sale to the public. The food items sold are deemed to be fit for human consumption and they are usually cheaper in price compared to those that are sold in hyper- and supermarkets.

4.2. Stage 2: Developing Research Questions

The research questions guiding the study were based on the PCCO framework: P—population (retail seafood), C—concept (incidence of antibiotic-resistant seafood-borne pathogens), C—context (Malaysia), and O—outcome (prevalence). The following research questions were therefore formulated to guide this study:
  • Are there seafood-borne pathogens in retail seafood sold in Malaysia?
  • Are these pathogens resistant to antibiotics?
  • What is the prevalence of antibiotic-resistant seafood-borne pathogens in retail seafood sold in Malaysia?

4.3. Stage 3: Identifying Relevant Primary Studies

To identify relevant primary studies to be used in this study, the following databases were searched: Web of Science, Science Direct, PubMed, and Scopus. The keywords used to search the databases for the relevant primary studies were “antibiotic resistance”, “fish”, “seafood”, “shellfish”, “crustaceans”, “finfish”, “antimicrobial”, and “antibiotic susceptibility”. These keywords were combined using Boolean operators “AND” and “OR” to ensure only primary studies relevant to this study were obtained. The primary studies were limited to Malaysia and primary studies published up to 2021 were considered.

4.4. Stage 4: Selection and Screening of Relevant Primary Studies

All the “relevant” studies obtained from the various databases were exported into Microsoft Excel and checked for duplicates. The titles and abstracts of the primary studies were screened based on the inclusion criteria below:
  • primary study carried out in Malaysia;
  • retail seafood samples were purchased from hyper-, super-, or wet markets;
  • types of antibiotics used were stated;
  • total number of samples (population) and positive samples were stated;
  • method of isolation and identification of seafood-borne pathogens.
The primary studies excluded were based on the exclusion criteria below:
  • primary studies involved diseased seafood;
  • processed seafood products;
  • studies involving only isolation and characterization;
  • studies involving pathogens from culture environment fish farms or ponds;
  • the studies were led by authors from other countries with Malaysian co-author(s).

4.5. Stage 5: Data Extraction

This stage of the study involved the descriptive summary extraction of the relevant primary studies that fulfill the aims of the systematic review and meta-analysis. The data extracted included author(s), journal, title, location of the study within Malaysia, year of publication, types and place of purchase of the seafood, and antibiotics investigated.

4.6. Stage 6: Data Analysis

The data analysis was carried out in two phases. In phase 1, a descriptive analysis was carried out Microsoft Excel (2022 version). The second phase involved obtaining the individual and pooled estimates of the prevalence of antibiotic-resistant seafood-borne pathogens in each retail seafood based on a random-effect meta-analysis model. However, the variation between the primary studies was evaluated using heterogeneity (I2). The presence of bias in the primary studies was determined, and the event rate was estimated at 95% confidence intervals using forest plots [10,11,66,67]. The analysis in phase 2 was carried out using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) software [68]. The study protocol was registered with Open Science Framework Registries with the registration DOI https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/5A284 (created on 17 March 2023).

5. Conclusions

This study provided a comprehensive understanding of the prevalent antibiotic-resistant seafood-borne pathogens in retail seafood in Malaysia. There is a need for continuous monitoring of the use of antibiotics in aquaculture and in retail seafood. This will help to implement effective management strategies to minimize the spread of antibiotic-resistant pathogens. These strategies include improved hygiene practices, reducing the use of antibiotics, and stricter regulations on aquaculture and water management. Overall, these studies highlight the urgent need for a One Health approach that recognizes the interconnectedness of human, animal, and environmental health. By working together to address the issue of antibiotic resistance, we can help to ensure a sustainable future for both human and animal populations.

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/antibiotics12050829/s1, Supplementary File S1: Antibiotics and seafood.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, O.A.O. (Omowale A. Odeyemi), O.A.O. (Olumide A. Odeyemi) and H.O.; methodology, O.A.O. (Olumide A. Odeyemi) and H.O.; formal analysis, O.A.O. (Omowale A. Odeyemi), O.A.O. (Olumide A. Odeyemi), M.A., H.O., F.R.D. and D.S.; data curation, O.A.O. (Omowale A. Odeyemi), O.A.O. (Olumide A. Odeyemi), F.R.D., N.A.K., H.O., M.A. and D.S.; writing—original draft preparation, M.A., F.R.D., H.O. and D.S.; writing—review and editing, O.A.O. (Omowale A. Odeyemi), O.A.O. (Olumide A. Odeyemi), M.A., H.O. and D.S.; visualization, O.A.O. (Olumide A. Odeyemi); project administration, O.A.O. (Olumide A. Odeyemi). All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The APC was funded by the University of Birmingham.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Available on request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Noger-Huet, É.; Vagner, M.; Le Grand, F.; Graziano, N.; Bideau, A.; Brault-Favrou, M.; Churlaud, C.; Bustamante, P.; Lacoue-Labarthe, T. Risk and benefit assessment of seafood consumption harvested from the Pertuis Charentais region of France. Environ. Pollut. 2022, 292, 118388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Odeyemi, O.A.; Burke, C.M.; Bolch, C.C.J.; Stanley, R. Seafood spoilage microbiota and associated volatile organic compounds at different storage temperatures and packaging conditions. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2018, 280, 87–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Guardone, L.; Tinacci, L.; Armani, A.; Trevisani, M. Residues of veterinary drugs in fish and fish products: An analysis of RASFF data over the last 20 years. Food Control 2022, 135, 108780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Odeyemi, O.; Somorin, Y.; Ateba, C.; Onyeaka, H.; Anyogu, A. Pathogens associated with seafood exports from southeast asia to the European Union: Analysis of the Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (1997–2020). Bulg. J. Vet. Med. 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Dey, D.; Chowdhury, S.; Sen, R. Insight into recent advances on nanotechnology-mediated removal of antibiotic resistant bacteria and genes. J. Water Process Eng. 2023, 52, 103535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Parlapani, F.F.; Boziaris, I.S.; Mireles DeWitt, C.A. Chapter 32-Pathogens and their sources in freshwater fish, sea finfish, shellfish, and algae. In Present Knowledge in Food Safety; Knowles, M.E., Anelich, L.E., Boobis, A.R., Popping, B., Eds.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2023; pp. 471–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Himanshu, R.; Prudencio, C.; da Costa, A.C.; Leal, E.; Chang, C.-M.; Pandey, R.P. Systematic Surveillance and Meta-Analysis of Antimicrobial Resistance and Food Sources from China and the USA. Antibiotics 2022, 11, 1471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Ma, J.-Y.; Zhu, X.-K.; Hu, R.-G.; Qi, Z.-Z.; Sun, W.-C.; Hao, Z.-P.; Cong, W.; Kang, Y.-H. A systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression of the global prevalence of foodborne Vibrio spp. infection in fishes: A persistent public health concern. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2023, 187, 114521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Hamidiyan, N.; Salehi-Abargouei, A.; Rezaei, Z.; Dehghani-Tafti, R.; Akrami-Mohajeri, F. The prevalence of Listeria spp. food contamination in Iran: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Food Res. Int. 2018, 107, 437–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Odeyemi, O.A. Incidence and prevalence of Vibrio parahaemolyticus in seafood: A systematic review and meta-analysis. SpringerPlus 2016, 5, 464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Sani, N.A.; Odeyemi, O.A. Occurrence and prevalence of Cronobacter spp. in plant and animal derived food sources: A systematic review and meta-analysis. SpringerPlus 2015, 4, 545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Spaur, M.; Davis, B.J.K.; Kivitz, S.; DePaola, A.; Bowers, J.C.; Curriero, F.C.; Nachman, K.E. A systematic review of post-harvest interventions for Vibrio parahaemolyticus in raw oysters. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 745, 140795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Gonzales-Barron, U.; Thébault, A.; Kooh, P.; Watier, L.; Sanaa, M.; Cadavez, V. Strategy for systematic review of observational studies and meta-analysis modelling of risk factors for sporadic foodborne diseases. Microb. Risk Anal. 2021, 17, 100082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Hussain, N.; Hussain, F.; Bhandari, M.; Morshed, S. Systematic reviews and meta-analysis. Evid.-Based Orthop. 2011, 20, 57–59. [Google Scholar]
  15. Balduzzi, S.; Rücker, G.; Schwarzer, G. How to perform a meta-analysis with R: A practical tutorial. BMJ Ment. Health 2019, 22, 153–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Impellizzeri, F.M.; Bizzini, M. Systematic review and meta-analysis: A primer. Int. J. Sport. Phys. Ther. 2012, 7, 493. [Google Scholar]
  17. Tober, M. PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus or Google Scholar–Which is the best search engine for an effective literature research in laser medicine? Med. Laser Appl. 2011, 26, 139–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Ministry of Higher Education. The National Higher Education Strategic Plan Beyond 2020; Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia Putrajaya: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 2007.
  19. Amran, F.H.; Rahman, I.K.A.; Salleh, K.; Ahmad, S.N.S.; Haron, N.H. Funding Trends of Research Universities in Malaysia. Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sci. 2014, 164, 126–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Kurniawan, S.B.; Ahmad, A.; Rahim, N.F.M.; Said, N.S.M.; Alnawajha, M.M.; Imron, M.F.; Abdullah, S.R.S.; Othman, A.R.; Ismail, N.I.; Hasan, H.A. Aquaculture in Malaysia: Water-related environmental challenges and opportunities for cleaner production. Environ. Technol. Innov. 2021, 24, 101913. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Pigłowski, M. Hazards in Seafood Notified in the Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (RASFF) in 1996–2020. Water 2023, 15, 548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. European Food Safety Authority; European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. The European Union summary report on trends and sources of zoonoses, zoonotic agents and food-borne outbreaks in 2013. EFSA J. 2015, 13, 3991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Li, T.-H.; Chiu, C.-H.; Chen, W.-C.; Chen, C.-M.; Hsu, Y.-M.; Chiou, S.-S.; Chiou, C.-S.; Chang, C.-C. Consumption of groundwater as an independent risk factor of Salmonella Choleraesuis infection: A case-control study in Taiwan. J. Environ. Health 2009, 72, 28–32. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  24. Budiati, T.; Rusul, G.; Wan-Abdullah, W.N.; Arip, Y.M.; Ahmad, R.; Thong, K.L. Prevalence, antibiotic resistance and plasmid profiling of Salmonella in catfish (Clarias gariepinus) and tilapia (Tilapia mossambica) obtained from wet markets and ponds in Malaysia. Aquaculture 2013, 372–375, 127–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Novoslavskij, A.; Terentjeva, M.; Eizenberga, I.; Valciņa, O.; Bartkevičs, V.; Bērziņš, A. Major foodborne pathogens in fish and fish products: A review. Ann. Microbiol. 2016, 66, 1–15. [Google Scholar]
  26. Rahimi, E.; Shakerian, A.; Falavarjani, A.G. Prevalence and antimicrobial resistance of Salmonella isolated from fish, shrimp, lobster, and crab in Iran. Comp. Clin. Pathol. 2013, 22, 59–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Ponce, E.; Khan, A.A.; Cheng, C.-M.; Summage-West, C.; Cerniglia, C.E. Prevalence and characterization of Salmonella enterica serovar Weltevreden from imported seafood. Food Microbiol. 2008, 25, 29–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Hatha, A.M.; Lakshmanaperumalsamy, P. Prevalence of Salmonellain fish and crustaceans from markets in Coimbatore, South India. Food Microbiol. 1997, 14, 111–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Shabarinath, S.; Kumar, H.S.; Khushiramani, R.; Karunasagar, I.; Karunasagar, I. Detection and characterization of Salmonella associated with tropical seafood. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2007, 114, 227–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Basti, A.A.; Misaghi, A.; Salehi, T.Z.; Kamkar, A. Bacterial pathogens in fresh, smoked and salted Iranian fish. Food Control 2006, 17, 183–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Alexopoulos, A.; Plessas, S.; Voidarou, C.; Noussias, H.; Stavropoulou, E.; Mantzourani, I.; Tzora, A.; Skoufos, I.; Bezirtzoglou, E. Microbial ecology of fish species ongrowing in Greek sea farms and their watery environment. Anaerobe 2011, 17, 264–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Hudecová, K.; Buchtová, H.; Steinhauserová, I. Effects of modified atmosphere packaging on the microbiological properties of fresh common carp (Cyprinus carpio L.). Acta Vet. Brno 2010, 79, 93–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Chatterjee, S.; Haldar, S. Vibrio related diseases in aquaculture and development of rapid and accurate identification methods. J. Mar. Sci. Res. Dev. S 2012, 1, 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  34. Baker-Austin, C.; Stockley, L.; Rangdale, R.; Martinez-Urtaza, J. Environmental occurrence and clinical impact of Vibrio vulnificus and Vibrio parahaemolyticus: A European perspective. Environ. Microbiol. Rep. 2010, 2, 7–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Bibi, F.; Qaisrani, S.N.; Ahmad, A.N.; Akhtar, M.; Khan, B.N.; Ali, Z. Occurrence of Salmonella in freshwater fishes: A review. J. Anim. Plant Sci. 2015, 25, 303–310. [Google Scholar]
  36. Letchumanan, V.; Chan, K.-G.; Lee, L.-H. Vibrio parahaemolyticus: A review on the pathogenesis, prevalence, and advance molecular identification techniques. Front. Microbiol. 2014, 5, 705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Jakšić, S.; Uhitil, S.; Petrak, T.; Bažulić, D.; Karolyi, L.G. Occurrence of Vibrio spp. in sea fish, shrimps and bivalve molluscs harvested from Adriatic sea. Food Control 2002, 13, 491–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Koralage, M.S.G.; Alter, T.; Pichpol, D.; Strauch, E.; Zessin, K.-H.; Huehn, S. Prevalence and molecular characteristics of Vibrio spp. isolated from preharvest shrimp of the North Western Province of Sri Lanka. J. Food Prot. 2012, 75, 1846–1850. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Sperling, L.; Alter, T.; Huehn, S. Prevalence and antimicrobial resistance of Vibrio spp. in retail and farm shrimps in Ecuador. J. Food Prot. 2015, 78, 2089–2092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Ahmed, H.A.; El Bayomi, R.M.; Hussein, M.A.; Khedr, M.H.; Remela, E.M.A.; El-Ashram, A.M. Molecular characterization, antibiotic resistance pattern and biofilm formation of Vibrio parahaemolyticus and V. cholerae isolated from crustaceans and humans. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2018, 274, 31–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Papadopoulou, C.; Economou, E.; Zakas, G.; Salamoura, C.; Dontorou, C.; Apostolou, J. Microbiological and pathogenic contaminants of seafood in Greece. J. Food Qual. 2007, 30, 28–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Davies, A.R.; Capell, C.; Jehanno, D.; Nychas, G.J.; Kirby, R.M. Incidence of foodborne pathogens on European fish. Food Control 2001, 12, 67–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Roque, A.; Lopez-Joven, C.; Lacuesta, B.; Elandaloussi, L.; Wagley, S.; Furones, M.D.; Ruiz-Zarzuela, I.; de Blas, I.; Rangdale, R.; Gomez-Gil, B. Detection and identification of tdh-and trh-positive Vibrio parahaemolyticus strains from four species of cultured bivalve molluscs on the Spanish Mediterranean Coast. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2009, 75, 7574–7577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Biasizzo, M.; Kirbiš, A.; Marinšek, J. Bacterial contamination of shellfish in Slovenia. Slov. Vet. Res. 2005, 42, 83–87. [Google Scholar]
  45. Oliveira, J.; Cunha, A.; Castilho, F.; Romalde, J.; Pereira, M. Microbial contamination and purification of bivalve shellfish: Crucial aspects in monitoring and future perspectives–A mini-review. Food Control 2011, 22, 805–816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Moreno Roldan, E.; Rodríguez, E.E.; Vicente, C.N.; Navajas, M.F.C.; Abril, O.M. Microbial contamination of bivalve mollusks used for human consumption. J. Food Saf. 2011, 31, 257–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Chamosa, L.S.; Álvarez, V.E.; Nardelli, M.; Quiroga, M.P.; Cassini, M.H.; Centrón, D. Lateral antimicrobial resistance genetic transfer is active in the open environment. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Schar, D.; Klein, E.Y.; Laxminarayan, R.; Gilbert, M.; Van Boeckel, T.P. Global trends in antimicrobial use in aquaculture. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 21878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Janda, J.M.; Abbott, S.L. The genus Aeromonas: Taxonomy, pathogenicity, and infection. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2010, 23, 35–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Vila, J.; Ruiz, J.; Gallardo, F.; Vargas, M.; Soler, L.; Figueras, M.J.; Gascon, J. Aeromonas spp. and traveler’s diarrhea: Clinical features and antimicrobial resistance. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2003, 9, 552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Ebmeyer, S.; Kristiansson, E.; Larsson, D.J. The mobile FOX AmpC beta-lactamases originated in Aeromonas allosaccharophila. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 2019, 54, 798–802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Hassan, H.; Bakar Sade, A.; Sabbir Rahman, M. Malaysian hypermarket retailing development and expansion. Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag. 2013, 41, 584–595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Ekundayo, T.C.; Igere, B.E.; Iwu, C.D.; Oluwafemi, Y.D.; Tiamiyu, A.M.; Adesina, I.A.; Anuoluwa, I.A.; Ekundayo, E.A.; Bello, O.O.; Olaniyi, O.O.; et al. Prevalence of Laribacter hongkongensis in food and environmental matrices: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Food Microbiol. 2022, 107, 104089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Gonzales-Barron, U.; Butler, F. The use of meta-analytical tools in risk assessment for food safety. Food Microbiol. 2011, 28, 823–827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Rostamian, M.; Kooti, S.; Mohammadi, B.; Salimi, Y.; Akya, A. A systematic review and meta-analysis of Listeria monocytogenes isolated from human and non-human sources: The antibiotic susceptibility aspect. Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2022, 102, 115634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Radu, S.; Elhadi, N.; Hassan, Z.; Rusul, G.; Lihan, S.; Fifadara, N.; Yuherman; Purwati, E. Characterization of Vibrio vulnificus isolated from cockles (Anadara granosa): Antimicrobial resistance, plasmid profiles and random amplification of polymorphic DNA analysis. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 1998, 165, 139–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Radu, S.; Ahmad, N.; Ling, F.H.; Reezal, A. Prevalence and resistance to antibiotics for Aeromonas species from retail fish in Malaysia. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2003, 81, 261–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Chen, C.-H.; Shimada, T.; Elhadi, N.; Radu, S.; Nishibuchi, M. Phenotypic and genotypic characteristics and epidemiological significance of ctx+ strains of Vibrio cholerae isolated from seafood in Malaysia. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2004, 70, 1964–1972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Haifa-Haryani, W.O.; Amatul-Samahah, M.A.; Azzam-Sayuti, M.; Chin, Y.K.; Zamri-Saad, M.; Natrah, I.; Amal, M.N.A.; Satyantini, W.H.; Ina-Salwany, M.Y. Prevalence, Antibiotics Resistance and Plasmid Profiling of Vibrio spp. Isolated from Cultured Shrimp in Peninsular Malaysia. Microorganisms 2022, 10, 1851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Letchumanan, V.; Pusparajah, P.; Tan, L.T.; Yin, W.F.; Lee, L.H.; Chan, K.G. Occurrence and Antibiotic Resistance of Vibrio parahaemolyticus from Shellfish in Selangor, Malaysia. Front. Microbiol. 2015, 6, 1417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Letchumanan, V.; Yin, W.F.; Lee, L.H.; Chan, K.G. Prevalence and antimicrobial susceptibility of Vibrio parahaemolyticus isolated from retail shrimps in Malaysia. Front. Microbiol. 2015, 6, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Sing, C.K.; Khan, M.Z.I.; Daud, H.H.M.; Aziz, A.R. Prevalence of Salmonella sp in African Catfish (Clarias gariepinus) obtained from farms and wet markets in Kelantan, Malaysia and their antibiotic resistance. Sains Malays. 2016, 45, 1597–1602. [Google Scholar]
  63. Tan, C.W.; Malcolm, T.T.; Kuan, C.H.; Thung, T.Y.; Chang, W.S.; Loo, Y.Y.; Premarathne, J.M.; Ramzi, O.B.; Norshafawatie, M.F.; Yusralimuna, N. Prevalence and antimicrobial susceptibility of Vibrio parahaemolyticus isolated from short mackerels (Rastrelliger brachysoma) in Malaysia. Front. Microbiol. 2017, 8, 1087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Lee, L.H.; Ab Mutalib, N.S.; Law, J.W.; Wong, S.H.; Letchumanan, V. Discovery on Antibiotic Resistance Patterns of Vibrio parahaemolyticus in Selangor Reveals Carbapenemase Producing Vibrio parahaemolyticus in Marine and Freshwater Fish. Front. Microbiol. 2018, 9, 2513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Othman, B.R.; Kuan, C.H.; Mohammed, A.S.; Cheah, Y.K.; Tan, C.W.; New, C.Y.; Thung, T.Y.; San Chang, W.; Loo, Y.Y.; Nakaguchi, Y.; et al. Occurrence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in raw shellfish at retail markets in Malaysia and antibacterial efficacies of black seed (Nigella sativa) oil against MRSA. Food Control 2018, 90, 324–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Chilek, T.Z.T.; Yusoff, N.A.S.M.; Ahmad, F.; Zamri, A.I.; Ismail, N.; Razak, S.B.A. Prevalence and antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Vibrio parahaemolyticus isolated from peeled blood cockles (Anadara granosa) sold in Kuala Terengganu. Asian J. Agric. Biol. 2019, 7, 69–75. [Google Scholar]
  67. Tan, C.W.; Rukayadi, Y.; Hasan, H.; Thung, T.Y.; Lee, E.; Rollon, W.D.; Hara, H.; Kayali, A.Y.; Nishibuchi, M.; Radu, S. Prevalence and antibiotic resistance patterns of Vibrio parahaemolyticus isolated from different types of seafood in Selangor, Malaysia. Saudi J. Biol. Sci. 2020, 27, 1602–1608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Venggadasamy, V.; Tan, L.T.-H.; Law, J.W.-F.; Ser, H.-L.; Letchumanan, V.; Pusparajah, P. Incidence, Antibiotic Susceptibility and Characterization of Vibrio parahaemolyticus Isolated from Seafood in Selangor, Malaysia. Prog. Microbes Mol. Biol. 2021, 4, a0000233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Antibiotics 12 00829 g001 550
Figure 1. Flow diagram of selected studies.
Figure 1. Flow diagram of selected studies.
Antibiotics 12 00829 g001
Antibiotics 12 00829 g002 550
Figure 2. Location of studies (A), sources of retail seafood analyzed in the primary studies (B), and the retail seafood analyzed (C).
Figure 2. Location of studies (A), sources of retail seafood analyzed in the primary studies (B), and the retail seafood analyzed (C).
Antibiotics 12 00829 g002
Antibiotics 12 00829 g003 550
Figure 3. Types of (A) fish, (B) mollusks, and (C) crustaceans investigated for the presence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria.
Figure 3. Types of (A) fish, (B) mollusks, and (C) crustaceans investigated for the presence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria.
Antibiotics 12 00829 g003
Antibiotics 12 00829 g004 550
Figure 4. The distributions of the retail seafood were positive for pathogens in fish (A), mollusks (B), crustaceans (C), and cephalopods (D).
Figure 4. The distributions of the retail seafood were positive for pathogens in fish (A), mollusks (B), crustaceans (C), and cephalopods (D).
Antibiotics 12 00829 g004
Antibiotics 12 00829 g005 550
Figure 5. Antibiotic-resistant pathogens in retail fish.
Figure 5. Antibiotic-resistant pathogens in retail fish.
Antibiotics 12 00829 g005
Antibiotics 12 00829 g006a 550Antibiotics 12 00829 g006b 550
Figure 6. Distribution of antibiotic-resistant seafood-borne pathogens in retail fish sold in Malaysia. (A) Distribution of Aeromonas in fish: (A = Tilapia mossambicus; B = Clarias batrachus; Tilapia mossambicus; C = Chinese herring (Tenulosa toli); D = The northern red snapper; E = The climbing perch (Anabas testudineus); F = The northern red snapper). Pathogens: (A.hy = A. hydrophila; A.veb= A. veronii biovar sobria and A.ca = A. caviae. (B) Distribution of Salmonella in fish: A = Tilapia mossambicus; B = C. gariepinus; S.Ag = S. agona; S.Al = S. albany; S.Co = S. corvallis and S.Ty = S. typhimurium. (C) Distribution of V. parahaemolyticus in fish. A = Oreochromis spp.; B = catfish Clarias batrachus; C = Indian mackerel (Rastrelliger kanagurta); D = Short mackerels (R. branchysoma); E = Yellowstripe scad (Selaroides leptolepis) and F = Black pomfret (Parastromateus niger). V.pa = V. parahaemolyticus.
Figure 6. Distribution of antibiotic-resistant seafood-borne pathogens in retail fish sold in Malaysia. (A) Distribution of Aeromonas in fish: (A = Tilapia mossambicus; B = Clarias batrachus; Tilapia mossambicus; C = Chinese herring (Tenulosa toli); D = The northern red snapper; E = The climbing perch (Anabas testudineus); F = The northern red snapper). Pathogens: (A.hy = A. hydrophila; A.veb= A. veronii biovar sobria and A.ca = A. caviae. (B) Distribution of Salmonella in fish: A = Tilapia mossambicus; B = C. gariepinus; S.Ag = S. agona; S.Al = S. albany; S.Co = S. corvallis and S.Ty = S. typhimurium. (C) Distribution of V. parahaemolyticus in fish. A = Oreochromis spp.; B = catfish Clarias batrachus; C = Indian mackerel (Rastrelliger kanagurta); D = Short mackerels (R. branchysoma); E = Yellowstripe scad (Selaroides leptolepis) and F = Black pomfret (Parastromateus niger). V.pa = V. parahaemolyticus.
Antibiotics 12 00829 g006aAntibiotics 12 00829 g006b
Antibiotics 12 00829 g007 550
Figure 7. Antibiotic-resistant pathogens in retail mollusk.
Figure 7. Antibiotic-resistant pathogens in retail mollusk.
Antibiotics 12 00829 g007
Antibiotics 12 00829 g008 550
Figure 8. Distribution of antibiotic-resistant seafood-borne pathogens in retail mollusk sold in Malaysia. (A). Distribution of Vibrio in mollusk: A = Blood cockles/clam (Anadara granosa), B = Blood clam (Tegillarca granosa), C = Short-necked clam (Paratapes undulatus), D = Surf clam (Paphia undulata), E = Carpet clam (Paphia textile), F = Hard shell clam (Meretrix meretrix), G = Blue crab, H = Mud crab (Scylla serrate), I = Flower crab (Portunus pelagicus), J = Sea snail-mud creeper (Cerithidea obtuse), V.vu = V. vulnificus, V.ch = V. cholera and V.pa = V. parahaemolyticus. (B). Distribution of MRSA in mollusk: Blood cockles/clam (Anadara granosa), and green mussels.
Figure 8. Distribution of antibiotic-resistant seafood-borne pathogens in retail mollusk sold in Malaysia. (A). Distribution of Vibrio in mollusk: A = Blood cockles/clam (Anadara granosa), B = Blood clam (Tegillarca granosa), C = Short-necked clam (Paratapes undulatus), D = Surf clam (Paphia undulata), E = Carpet clam (Paphia textile), F = Hard shell clam (Meretrix meretrix), G = Blue crab, H = Mud crab (Scylla serrate), I = Flower crab (Portunus pelagicus), J = Sea snail-mud creeper (Cerithidea obtuse), V.vu = V. vulnificus, V.ch = V. cholera and V.pa = V. parahaemolyticus. (B). Distribution of MRSA in mollusk: Blood cockles/clam (Anadara granosa), and green mussels.
Antibiotics 12 00829 g008
Antibiotics 12 00829 g009 550
Figure 9. Distribution of Vibrio in crustaceans: A = Banana prawn (Penaeus indicus), B = Red prawn (Solenocera subnuda), C = Tiger prawn (Penaeus monodon), D = Indian white shrimp (Penaeus indicus), E = Shrimp. V.ch = V. cholera, and V.pa = V. parahaemolyticus.
Figure 9. Distribution of Vibrio in crustaceans: A = Banana prawn (Penaeus indicus), B = Red prawn (Solenocera subnuda), C = Tiger prawn (Penaeus monodon), D = Indian white shrimp (Penaeus indicus), E = Shrimp. V.ch = V. cholera, and V.pa = V. parahaemolyticus.
Antibiotics 12 00829 g009
Table
Table 1. Summary of random-effect meta-analysis (NC = not completed).
Table 1. Summary of random-effect meta-analysis (NC = not completed).
Retail SeafoodPrevalence/Effect Size 95% CIHeterogeneity
Q ValuedfI2p-Value
Prevalence of antibiotic-resistant pathogens in retail seafood in Malaysia
Overall prevalence55.7% (95% CI: 0.46–0.65)443.732793.90
Prevalence based on seafood types
Fish62.7% (95% CI: 0.52–0.73)61.21083.70
Mollusks47.5% (95% CI: 0.35–0.61)98.31089.80
Crustaceans55.5% (95% CI: 0.48–0.52)172497.60
Cephalopods80.0% (95% CI: 0.64–0.90)NCNCNCNC
Table
Table 2. Types of antibiotics used across the studies (√ indicates antibiotics used in the study).
Table 2. Types of antibiotics used across the studies (√ indicates antibiotics used in the study).
Antibiotics[14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26]
Amikacin √√ √√√ √√
Amoxicillin/clavulanic acid √ √ √
Ampicillin√√√ √√ √√ √√√
Ampicillin-sulbactam √√ √√ √√
Azithromycin √
Bacitracin √
Carbenicillin√√
Cefazolin √
Cefepime √ √
Cefoperazone √
Cefotaxime √√ √√√ √
Cefoxitin √
Ceftaroline √
Ceftazidime √√√√√√ √√
Ceftriaxone √ √
Cefuroxime √√
Cephalothin √ √ √
Ceftazidime √
Chloramphenicol√√√√√√ √√√√√√
Ciprofloxacin √√ √ √√√
Clarythromycin √
Clindamycin √ √
Doxycycline √ √
Erythromycin√√ √
Gentamicin√√√ √√ √√√ √√
Imipenem √√ √√ √√
Kanamycin√√√ √√ √ √
Levofloxacin √√ √√√ √√
Linezolid √
Meropenem √ √
Nalidixic acid√√√ √√ √ √
Norfloxacin √√
Ofloxacin √ √
Oxytetracycline √√ √ √
Penicillin√ √√ √√√
Piperacillin √
Piperacillin-tazobactam √
Quinupristin/dalfopristin √
Rifampicin √ √
Spectinomycin √
Streptomycin√√√ √ √
Sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim √√√√ √ √√
Teicoplanin √
Tetracycline√√√√√√√√√ √√√
Tobramycin √
Trimethoprim √
Table
Table 3. Summary of random-effect meta-analysis.
Table 3. Summary of random-effect meta-analysis.
Retail SeafoodPrevalence/Effect Size 95% CIHeterogeneity
Q ValuedfI2p-Value
Prevalence of antibiotic resistance based on pathogens and type of seafood
Fish (overall prevalence)22.2% (95% CI: 0.15–0.32)943.62697.20
Aeromonas51% (95% CI: 0.33–0.69)197.71393.40
Salmonella59.9% (95% CI: 0.32–0.82)15.21467.10.009
Vibrio10.2% (95% CI: 0.06–0.18)7741897.60
Mollusks (overall prevalence)10.5% (95% CI: 0.07–0.16)17192898.40
Vibrio10.2% (95% CI: 0.07–0.15)1661.82898.30
MRSA70.9% (95% CI: 0.36–0.92)6.7355.270.082
Crustaceans (overall prevalence)23.4% (95% CI: 0.15–0.34)578.82495.80
Vibrio47.5% (95% CI: 0.35–0.61)98.31089.80
Cephalopods (overall prevalence)67.2% (95% CI: 0.22–0.94)94.11287.20
Vibrio67.2% (95% CI: 0.22–0.94)94.11287.20
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Odeyemi, O.A.; Amin, M.; Dewi, F.R.; Kasan, N.A.; Onyeaka, H.; Stratev, D.; Odeyemi, O.A. Prevalence of Antibiotic-Resistant Seafood-Borne Pathogens in Retail Seafood Sold in Malaysia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Antibiotics 2023, 12, 829. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics12050829

AMA Style

Odeyemi OA, Amin M, Dewi FR, Kasan NA, Onyeaka H, Stratev D, Odeyemi OA. Prevalence of Antibiotic-Resistant Seafood-Borne Pathogens in Retail Seafood Sold in Malaysia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Antibiotics. 2023; 12(5):829. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics12050829

Chicago/Turabian Style

Odeyemi, Omowale A., Muhamad Amin, Fera R. Dewi, Nor Azman Kasan, Helen Onyeaka, Deyan Stratev, and Olumide A. Odeyemi. 2023. "Prevalence of Antibiotic-Resistant Seafood-Borne Pathogens in Retail Seafood Sold in Malaysia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis" Antibiotics 12, no. 5: 829. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics12050829

APA Style

Odeyemi, O. A., Amin, M., Dewi, F. R., Kasan, N. A., Onyeaka, H., Stratev, D., & Odeyemi, O. A. (2023). Prevalence of Antibiotic-Resistant Seafood-Borne Pathogens in Retail Seafood Sold in Malaysia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Antibiotics, 12(5), 829. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics12050829

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop