| Literature DB >> 26843987 |
Mojtaba Anvarinejad1, Gholamreza Pouladfar1, Aziz Japoni1, Shahram Bolandparvaz2, Zeinab Satiary3, Pejman Abbasi1, Jalal Mardaneh4.
Abstract
Background. Diabetic foot infections (DFIs) are a major public health issue and identification of the microorganisms causing such polymicrobial infections is useful to find out appropriate antibiotic therapy. Meanwhile, many reports have shown antibiotic resistance rising dramatically. In the present study, we sought to determine the prevalence of microorganisms detected on culture in complicated DFIs in hospitalized patients and their antibiotic sensitivity profiles. Methods. A cross-sectional study was conducted for a period of 24 months from 2012 to 2014 in Nemazee Hospital, Shiraz, Iran. The demographic and clinical features of the patients were obtained. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing to different agents was carried out using the disc diffusion method. Results. During this period, 122 aerobic microorganisms were isolated from DFIs. Among Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria, Staphylococcus spp. and E. coli were the most frequent organisms isolated, respectively. Of the isolates, 91% were multidrug while 78% of S. aureus isolates were methicillin resistant. 53% of Gram-negative bacteria were positive for extended-spectrum β-lactamase. Conclusion. Given the involvement of different microorganisms and emergence of multidrug resistant strains, clinicians are advised to consider culture before initiation of empirical therapy.Entities:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26843987 PMCID: PMC4710915 DOI: 10.1155/2015/328796
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Pathog ISSN: 2090-3057
Demographic and clinical data of diabetic foot patients.
| Parameter | Values | [Range or |
|---|---|---|
| Mean duration of diabetes (years) | 13.5 | |
|
| ||
| Wound size | ≤4 mm | 22 (25) |
| ≥4 mm | 64 (75) | |
|
| ||
| Weight range | ≤50 kgs | 4 (5) |
| 50–75 | 54 (63) | |
| ≥75 | 28 (32) | |
|
| ||
| Diabetic type | Type 1 | 45 (52) |
| Type 2 | 41 (48) | |
|
| ||
| Amputation | 42 (49) | |
|
| ||
| Wagner grading of ulcer | 0 | 9 (11) |
| I | 17 (20) | |
| II | 15 (17) | |
| III | 31 (36) | |
| IV | 14 (16) | |
|
| ||
| Complication | Vascular diseases | 48 (56) |
| Hypertension | 32 (37) | |
| Neuropathy | 22 (25) | |
| Nephropathy | 14 (16) | |
| Retinopathy | 10 (11) | |
Frequency of organisms isolated from diabetic foot patients.
| Organism | Frequency |
|---|---|
|
| 34 (27) |
|
| 28 (22) |
|
| 25 (20) |
|
| 9 (7) |
|
| 4 (3) |
|
| 3 (3) |
|
| 3 (3) |
| Diphtheroid spp. | 2 (2) |
|
| 2 (2) |
|
| 1 (1) |
|
| 1 (1) |
| Beta hemolytic strep. g. A | 1 (1) |
|
| 1 (1) |
|
| 1 (1) |
|
| 1 (1) |
|
| 1 (1) |
|
| 1 (1) |
|
| 1 (1) |
| Fungi | 3 (3) |
| Totally | 122 |
Figure 1Antibiotic resistance patterns of S. aureus isolated from diabetic foot patients.
Antibiotic resistance patterns of Enterobacteriaceae (32) strains isolated from diabetic foot patients.
| Antibiotic | Total resistant strains |
|---|---|
| Tetracycline | 29 (90) |
| Ampicillin | 27 (84) |
| Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole | 25 (78) |
| Ciprofloxacin | 25 (78) |
| Amoxicillin clavulanic acid | 21 (65) |
| Cefalexin | 21 (65) |
| Cefotaxime | 18 (56) |
| Chloramphenicol | 18 (56) |
| Tobramycin | 18 (56) |
| Aztreonam | 17 (53) |
| Ceftriaxone | 17 (53) |
| Ceftazidime | 16 (50) |
| Cefepime | 15 (47) |
| Piperacillin tazobactam | 13 (40) |
| Gentamicin | 13 (40) |
| Meropenem | 3 (9) |
| Amikacin | 2 (6) |
| Imipenem | 1 (3) |
|
|
|
Figure 2Antibiotic resistance patterns of nonfermenter Gram-negative strains isolated from diabetic foot patients.