| Literature DB >> 32104519 |
Dipendra Kumar Mandal1,2, Shiv Kumar Sah3, Shyam Kumar Mishra4, Sangita Sharma4, Hari Prasad Kattel4, Sanjeet Pandit5, Pranav Kumar Yadav6, Ujjwal Laghu7, Rajani Lama4, Niranjan Prasad Sah4, Jeevan Bahadur Sherchand4, Keshav Parajuli4, Anup Bastola2, Sher Bahadur Pun2, Basista Prasad Rijal4, Bharat Mani Pokharel4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)- and AmpC-β-lactamase (ESBL)- and AmpC-Enterobacteriaceae have recently emerged as a public threat in the treatment of nosocomial as well as community-acquired infections. Very little information is currently available about its existence in Nepal. We, therefore, aim to determine the prevalence of ESBL and AmpC-β-lactamase (ESBL)- and AmpC-Enterobacteriaceae have recently emerged as a public threat in the treatment of nosocomial as well as community-acquired infections. Very little information is currently available about its existence in Nepal. We, therefore, aim to determine the prevalence of ESBL and AmpC.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32104519 PMCID: PMC7036101 DOI: 10.1155/2020/5154217
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol ISSN: 1712-9532 Impact factor: 2.471
Characteristics of the study population.
| Characteristics | OPD | Healthy population |
|---|---|---|
| Age, mean ± SD | 35.04 ± 14.23 | 25.91 ± 11.93 |
| Sex | ||
| Male | 55 (53.92) | 46 (52.27) |
| Female | 47 (46.07) | 42 (47.72) |
| Hospitalization (in previous years) | ||
| Yes | 47 (46.07) | 14 (15.90) |
| No | 55 (53.92) | 74 (84.09) |
| Antibiotic use <3 months | ||
| Yes | 19 (18.62) | 8 (9.09) |
| No | 68 (66.7) | 68 (77.72) |
| Unknown | 15 (14.70) | 12 (13.63) |
| Antibiotics used | ||
| Ciprofloxacin | 6 | 1 |
| Amoxicillin | 7 | 3 |
| Cefixime | 1 | 3 |
| Azithromicin | 3 | 1 |
| Ciprofloxacin + cotrimoxazole | 1 | 0 |
| Amoxicillin + azithromicin | 1 | 0 |
Healthy population (N = 88) = 58 students of college +30 community participants. OPD (outpatient department).
Distribution of β-lactamases in different clusters of sample.
| Total (OPD + healthy population) | OPD patients (total isolates, | Healthy population (total isolates, | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ESBL | 74/260 (28.46%) | 47/152 (30.92%) | 27/108 (25%) |
| AmpC- | 35/260 (13.46%) | 28/152 (18.4%) | 7/108 (6.4%) |
| Coproducer | 23/260 (8.84%) | 21/152 (13.81%) | 2/108 (1.8%) |
| Total | 132 | 96 | 36 |
ESBL, AmpC-β-lactamase, and coproducer positive isolates in different species from hospital and community setting.
| Organisms | OPD population | Healthy population | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ESBL+ | Coproducer | AmpC+ | ESBL+ | Coproducer | AmpC+ | |
|
| 33/47 | 10/21 | 14/28 | 21/27 | 0 | 0 |
|
| (70.2) | (47.6) | (50.0) | (77.8) | ||
|
| 6/47 | 2/21 | 5/28 | 4/27 | 1/2 | 5/7 |
|
| (12.7) | (9.5) | (17.85) | (14.21) | (50.0) | (71.42) |
| C. | 1/47 | 1/21 | 5/28 | 2/27 | 1/2 | 2/7 (28.57) |
|
| (2.1) | (4.7) | (17.85) | (7.4) | (50.0) | |
|
| 3/47 | 1/21 | 1/28 | 0 | 0 | |
|
| (6.3) | (4.7) | (3.5) | |||
| C. | 1/47 | 6/21 | 1/28 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
| (2.1) | (28.6) | (3.5) | |||
|
| 2/47 | 1/21 | 2/28 | |||
|
| (4.2) | (4.7) | (7.8) | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
| 1 (2.1) | 0 (0.00) | 0 (0.00) | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
| ||||||
| Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 1Antimicrobial susceptibility of ESBL-producing strains (n = 47) in OPD participants.
Figure 2Antimicrobial susceptibility of ESBL-producing strains (n = 27) in healthy participants.
Association among various clinical characteristics with ESBL producers and nonproducers.
| Covariate | OPD (outpatient department) |
| Healthy population |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ESBL (+) | ESBL (−) | ESBL (+) | ESBL (−) | |||
| Age, mean ± SD | 35.4 ± 13.4 | 34.8 ± 14.7 | .848 | 25.7 ± 10.7 | 25.9 ± 12.3 | 0.921 |
| Gender | 0.56 | 0.73 | ||||
| Male | 27 | 55 | 12 | 39 | ||
| Female | 20 | 50 | 15 | 42 | ||
| Antibiotic use <3 months (+) | 7 | 19 | 0.63 | 7 | 13 | 0.25 |
| ABX use with /without prescription | 0.66 | 0.21 | ||||
| With prescription | 34 | 75 | 22 | 68 | ||
| Without prescription | 11 | 28 | 4 | 13 | ||
| Both | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | ||
| Hospitalization previous year (+) | 21 | 45 | 0.83 | 5 | 10 | 0.42 |
| Previous worked in hospital (+) | 2 | 8 | 0.43 | 9 | 16 | 0.14 |
| Visit hospital within 3 months (+) | 20 | 51 | 0.49 | 19 | 44 | 0.14 |
| Smoking history (+) | 11 | 12 | 0.057 | |||
| Alcohol intake (+) | 13 | 22 | 0.36 | 6 | 8 | 0.09 |
| Toilet facilities (+) | 45 | 105 | 0.033 | 25 | 80 | 0.091 |
| Meat consumption (+) | 40 | 93 | 0.55 | 25 | 70 | 0.39 |
| Milk consumption | 46 | 100 | 0.44 | 26 | 81 | 0.082 |
| Source of food intake | 0.16 | 0.003 | ||||
| Home | 41 | 77 | 19 | 72 | ||
| Hotel | 1 | 4 | 0 | 4 | ||
| Both | 5 | 24 | 8 | 5 | ||
| Travel abroad (+) | 10 | 31 | 0.29 | 5 | 5 | 0.055 |
Pearson chi-squared test was applied, where a P value ≤0.05 was considered to be statistically significant.