Revathy Girish1, Anil Kumar2, Sadia Khan3, Kavitha R Dinesh4, Shamsul Karim5. 1. MSc, Department of Microbiology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences , Ponekara, Kochi-682041, Kerala India . 2. Clinical Associate Professor, Department of Microbiology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences , Ponekara, Kochi-682041, Kerala India . 3. Clinical Assistant Professor, Department of Microbiology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences , Ponekara, Kochi-682041, Kerala, India . 4. Clinical Professor, Department of Microbiology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences , Ponekara, Kochi-682041, Kerala India . 5. Professor & Head, Department of Microbiology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences , Ponekara, Kochi-682041, Kerala India .
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the minimum inhibitory concentration of ciprofloxacin among 50 blood stream isolates of Salmonella enterica. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 50 consecutive isolates of Salmonella enterica were tested for susceptibility to antimicrobials using the Kirby Bauer disk diffusion method. Minimum inhibitory concentrations were determined using Hi-Comb strips. All results were interpreted according to the CLSI guidelines. RESULTS: Of the 50 isolates 70%were Salmonella Typhi, 4% Salmonella paratyphi A, 2% Salmonella paratyphi B and the remaining 10% were identified only as Salmonella species. Using the CLSI 2011 breakpoints for disc diffusion, 86% (43/50) were resistant to nalidixic acid(NA), 22% (11/50) to ciprofloxacin, 12% to azithromycin, 6% to cotrimoxazole, 4% to ampicillin and 1% to chloramphenicol. The MIC50 and MIC90 of ciprofloxacin for S.Typhi were 0.181 μg/mL and 5.06 μg/mL respectively. While the same for S. paratyphi A was 0.212μg/mL and 0.228μg/mL respectively. None of the isolates were multi drug resistant and all were susceptible to ceftriaxone. Using the CLSI 2012 revised ciprofloxacin breakpoints for disc diffusion (>31mm) & MIC (<0.06 μg/mL), 90% (45/50) of these isolates were found to be resistant. CONCLUSION: MIC's of ciprofloxacin should be reported for all salmonella isolates and should be used to guide treatment. Blindly following western guidelines for a disease which is highly endemic in the subcontinent will spell the death knell of a cheap and effective drug in our armamentarium. Therefore it will be too premature to declare that "the concept of using ciprofloxacin in typhoid fever is dead!"
OBJECTIVES: To determine the minimum inhibitory concentration of ciprofloxacin among 50 blood stream isolates of Salmonella enterica. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 50 consecutive isolates of Salmonella enterica were tested for susceptibility to antimicrobials using the Kirby Bauer disk diffusion method. Minimum inhibitory concentrations were determined using Hi-Comb strips. All results were interpreted according to the CLSI guidelines. RESULTS: Of the 50 isolates 70%were Salmonella Typhi, 4% Salmonella paratyphi A, 2% Salmonella paratyphi B and the remaining 10% were identified only as Salmonella species. Using the CLSI 2011 breakpoints for disc diffusion, 86% (43/50) were resistant to nalidixic acid(NA), 22% (11/50) to ciprofloxacin, 12% to azithromycin, 6% to cotrimoxazole, 4% to ampicillin and 1% to chloramphenicol. The MIC50 and MIC90 of ciprofloxacin for S.Typhi were 0.181 μg/mL and 5.06 μg/mL respectively. While the same for S. paratyphi A was 0.212μg/mL and 0.228μg/mL respectively. None of the isolates were multi drug resistant and all were susceptible to ceftriaxone. Using the CLSI 2012 revised ciprofloxacin breakpoints for disc diffusion (>31mm) & MIC (<0.06 μg/mL), 90% (45/50) of these isolates were found to be resistant. CONCLUSION: MIC's of ciprofloxacin should be reported for all salmonella isolates and should be used to guide treatment. Blindly following western guidelines for a disease which is highly endemic in the subcontinent will spell the death knell of a cheap and effective drug in our armamentarium. Therefore it will be too premature to declare that "the concept of using ciprofloxacin in typhoid fever is dead!"
Authors: Dong-Min Kim; Ganesh Prasad Neupane; Sook Jin Jang; Sung Hun Kim; Bok Kwon Lee Journal: Int J Antimicrob Agents Date: 2010-05-15 Impact factor: 5.283
Authors: Christopher M Parry; Chau Tran Thuy; Sabina Dongol; Abhilasha Karkey; Ha Vinh; Nguyen Tran Chinh; Pham Thanh Duy; Tran Vu Thieu Nga; James I Campbell; Nguyen Van Minh Hoang; Amit Arjyal; Zulfiqar A Bhutta; Sujit K Bhattacharya; Magdarina D Agtini; Baiqing Dong; Do Gia Canh; Aliya Naheed; John Wain; Tran Tinh Hien; Buddha Basnyat; Leon Ochiai; John Clemens; Jeremy J Farrar; Christiane Dolecek; Stephen Baker Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2010-09-13 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: T Butler; C B Sridhar; M K Daga; K Pathak; R B Pandit; R Khakhria; C N Potkar; M T Zelasky; R B Johnson Journal: J Antimicrob Chemother Date: 1999-08 Impact factor: 5.790
Authors: Malini R Capoor; Deepthi Nair; Azra S Hasan; Pushpa Aggarwal; B Gupta Journal: Southeast Asian J Trop Med Public Health Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 0.267
Authors: Thi Anh Hong Le; Laëtitia Fabre; Philippe Roumagnac; Patrick A D Grimont; Maurice R Scavizzi; François-Xavier Weill Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2007-08-29 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Marianne M Lindgren; Pirkko Kotilainen; Pentti Huovinen; Saija Hurme; Susanna Lukinmaa; Mark A Webber; Laura J V Piddock; Anja Siitonen; Antti J Hakanen Journal: Emerg Infect Dis Date: 2009-05 Impact factor: 6.883
Authors: Grayson K Walker; M Mitsu Suyemoto; Dawn M Hull; Sesny Gall; Fernando Jimenez; Laura R Chen; Siddhartha Thakur; Rocio Crespo; Luke B Borst Journal: Front Vet Sci Date: 2021-09-01