| Literature DB >> 26587024 |
Pashupati Bhandari1, Ganesh Thapa2, Bharat Mani Pokhrel3, Dwij Raj Bhatta1, Upendra Devkota2.
Abstract
Multidrug resistant organisms are increasing day by day and the cause is poorly known. This study was carried out from June 2011 to May 2012 at National Institute of Neurological and Allied Sciences Kathmandu, Nepal, with a view to determining drug resistant pathogens along with detection of extended spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL), AmpC β-lactamase (ABL), and metallo-β-lactamase (MBL) producing bacteria causing infection to ICU patients. A standard methodology was used to achieve these objectives as per recommendation of American Society for Microbiology. ESBL was detected by combined disc assay using cefotaxime and cefotaxime clavulanic acid, ABL by inhibitor based method using cefoxitin and phenylboronic acid, and MBL by imipenem-EDTA combined disk method. Two hundred and ninety-four different clinical samples such as tracheal aspirates, urine, pus, swabs, catheter tips, and blood were processed during the study. Most common bacteria were Acinetobacter spp. Of the total 58 Acinetobacter spp., 46 (79%) were MDR, and 27% were positive for ABL and 12% were for MBL. Of the 32 cases of Staphylococcus aureus, 18 (56%) were MDR. Findings of this study warrant routine β-lactamase testing in clinical isolates.Entities:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26587024 PMCID: PMC4637486 DOI: 10.1155/2015/572163
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Microbiol
Growth pattern and distribution of MDR isolates in different samples.
| Specimen | Number of samples | Growth number (%) | Number (%) of MDR strains |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tracheal aspirates | 152 | 113 (74.3) | 94 (83.1) |
| Urine | 43 | 25 (58.2) | 19 (44.1) |
| Pus/wound swab | 31 | 18 (58.1) | 12 (66.6) |
| CVP tip | 24 | 10 (41.6) | 10 (100) |
| CSF | 24 | 4 (17.3) | 3 (75) |
| Blood | 9 | 1 (11.1) | 0 |
| ICP catheter | 3 | 1 (25) | 1 (33.3) |
| EVD drain tip | 2 | 2 (100) | 2 (100) |
| Nasal swab | 2 | 2 (100) | 0 |
| Others | 4 | 3 (75) | 1 (33.3) |
|
| |||
| Total | 294 | 179 (60.88) | 142 (79.3) |
Others include tissue from meningococcal cell, transsphenoidal mucosa, bone, and sputum.
Frequency of bacterial isolates and their multidrug resistant profile.
| SN | Bacterial isolates | Total isolate number | Multidrug resistance isolates number (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
| 58 | 46 (79.31) |
| 2 |
| 23 | 20 (86.95) |
| 3 |
| 22 | 18 (81.81) |
| 4 |
| 19 | 14 (73.62) |
| 5 |
| 19 | 16 (84.21) |
| 6 |
| 3 | 2 (66.66) |
| 7 |
| 3 | 3 (100) |
| 8 |
| 2 | 2 (100) |
| 9 |
| 32 | 18 (56.25) |
| 10 |
| 3 | 3 (100) |
| 11 | Viridans streptococci | 2 | 0 |
| 12 | Coagulase negative staphylococci | 1 | 0 |
|
| |||
| Total | 187 | 142 (75.93) | |
Multidrug resistance criteria: resistance to three or more drugs of different structural classes.
Antibiotics profile of major Gram negative pathogens.
| Antibiotics |
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ampicillin | NT | 100 | 100 | NT | 78.11 |
| Amikacin | 67.24 | 73.91 | 59.09 | 31.57 | 19.04 |
| Cotrimoxazole | 93.83 | 83.31 | 81.8 | 84.21 | 68.85 |
| Cefotaxime | 82.75 | 82.6 | 81.0 | 73.68 | 78.94 |
| Cefepime | 86.20 | 91.3 | 81.81 | 84.4 | 57.8 |
| Carbenicillin | NT | NT | NT | 42.1 | NT |
| Ciprofloxacin | 82.75 | 91.3 | 68.18 | 73.68 | 73.68 |
| Gentamycin | 70.68 | 82.6 | 59.09 | 42.1 | 47.36 |
| Imipenem | 17.24 | 0 | 18.18 | 0 | 0 |
| Ofloxacin | 68.96 | 60.80 | 63.63 | 47.36 | 63.15 |
| Piperacillin/tazobactam | 50.02 | 40.90 | 63.15 | 5.26 | 15.78 |
| Polymyxin B | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
NT: not tested.
Antibiotic susceptibility profile of S. aureus (n = 32).
| Antibiotic used | Sensitive | Resistant | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number | % | Number | % | |
| Ampicillin | 7 | 21.9 | 25 | 78.1 |
| Cotrimoxazole | 18 | 56.25 | 14 | 43.7 |
| Cefotaxime | 19 | 59.38 | 13 | 40.62 |
| Cefoxitin | 18 | 56.25 | 14 | 43.75 |
| Ciprofloxacin | 23 | 71.87 | 9 | 28.12 |
| Cloxacillin | 20 | 62.5 | 12 | 37.5 |
| Gentamycin | 25 | 78.12 | 7 | 21.87 |
| Methicillin | 22 | 68.75 | 10 | 31.25 |
| Ofloxacin | 24 | 75 | 8 | 25 |
| Vancomycin | 100 | 100 | 0 | 0 |
ESBL versus ABL versus MBL producing bacteria.
| Bacteria | ESBL production number (%) | ABL production number (%) | MBL production number (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 10 (25%) | 4 (7.8%) | 0 |
|
| 8 (20%) | 8 (15.6%) | 2 (18.1%) |
|
| 6 (15%) | 6 (11.7%) | 2 (18.1%) |
|
| 5 (12.5%) | 16 (31.37%) | 7 (63.8%) |
|
| 5 (12.5%) | 4 (7.8%) | 0 |
|
| 1 (2.5%) | 2 (3.9%) | 0 |
|
| 1 (2.5%) | 0 | 0 |
|
| 1 (2.5%) | 0 | 0 |
|
| 3 (7.5%) | 11 (21.5%) | 0 |
|
| |||
| Total | 40 (32.25%) | 51 (31.28%) | 11 (64.7%) |