Int. J. Life. Sci. Scienti. Res., VOLUME 2, ISSUE 1, pp: 1-8 (ISSN: 2455-1716) JANUARY-2016
http://ijlssr.com IJLSSR © 201...
Int. J. Life. Sci. Scienti. Res., Volume 2, Issue 1
http://ijlssr.com IJLSSR © 2015 All rights are reserved
have invariabl...
Int. J. Life. Sci. Scienti. Res., Volume 2, Issue 1
http://ijlssr.com IJLSSR © 2015 All rights are reserved
streptomycin (...
Int. J. Life. Sci. Scienti. Res., Volume 2, Issue 1
http://ijlssr.com IJLSSR © 2015 All rights are reserved
followed by St...
Int. J. Life. Sci. Scienti. Res., Volume 2, Issue 1
http://ijlssr.com IJLSSR © 2015 All rights are reserved
From the total...
Int. J. Life. Sci. Scienti. Res., Volume 2, Issue 1
http://ijlssr.com IJLSSR © 2015 All rights are reserved
genitourinary ...
Int. J. Life. Sci. Scienti. Res., Volume 2, Issue 1
http://ijlssr.com IJLSSR © 2015 All rights are reserved
among uropatho...
Int. J. Life. Sci. Scienti. Res., Volume 2, Issue 1
http://ijlssr.com IJLSSR © 2015 All rights are reserved
[25] Gupta V, ...
of 8

Prevalence of Antimicrobial Resistance in Bacterial Isolates Causing Urinary Tract Infection in Patients attending at IIMS&R Hospital, Lucknow

ABSTRACT- This study was an attempt to estimate the prevalence of Antimicrobial resistance in patients attending the OPD and IPD of IIMS&R, hospital, Lucknow. Total 453 urine samples were included in this study. Urinary isolates from symptomatic UTI cases were identified by conventional methods. Of the 453 processed samples 166 samples showed significant colony count of pathogens among which the most prevalent were E. coli (49.39%) followed by Klebsiella species (7.83%). The majority of the isolates were from female (68.67%) while the remaining was from male (31.32%). Dysuria was the most common clinical presentation followed by fever and abdominal pain. Diabetes and urogenital instrumentation were the major risk factors for UTI. Among the 166 urine samples which showed significant colony count, 152 (91.56%) of specimen showed pus cells in wet film examination. Among the gram-negative enteric bacilli high prevalence of resistance was observed against Ampicillin, Cefotaxime, Ciprofloxacin, Nalidixic acid and co-trimoxazole. 44% of isolates were detected to produce ESBL among the gram negative bacteria. Carbapenemase production was seen in 13 (11.71%) isolates. Among the 32 Enterococcus isolates 14 (43.75%) were resistant to High level Gentamicin, 2 (6.25%) were resistant to High level Streptomycin while 12 (37.50%) of isolates were resistant to both of the antimicrobial drugs. Among the 16 Staphylococcus species, 8 (50%) were MRSA. KEYWORDS- MRSA, Antimicrobial resistance, UTI, ESBL, Gram-negative bacteria
Published on: Mar 4, 2016
Published in: Health & Medicine      
Source: www.slideshare.net


Transcripts - Prevalence of Antimicrobial Resistance in Bacterial Isolates Causing Urinary Tract Infection in Patients attending at IIMS&R Hospital, Lucknow

  • 1. Int. J. Life. Sci. Scienti. Res., VOLUME 2, ISSUE 1, pp: 1-8 (ISSN: 2455-1716) JANUARY-2016 http://ijlssr.com IJLSSR © 2015 All rights are reserved Prevalence of Antimicrobial Resistance in Bacterial Isolates Causing Urinary Tract Infection in Patients attending at IIMS&R Hospital, Lucknow Nazreen Khan,1* Mohd. Shahid khan2 1,2 Department of Microbiology, Integral Institute of Medical Sciences and Research, India ABSTRACT- This study was an attempt to estimate the prevalence of Antimicrobial resistance in patients attending the OPD and IPD of IIMS&R, hospital, Lucknow. Total 453 urine samples were included in this study. Urinary isolates from symptomatic UTI cas- es were identified by conventional methods. Of the 453 processed samples 166 samples showed significant colony count of pathogens among which the most prevalent were E. coli (49.39%) followed by Klebsiella species (7.83%). The majority of the isolates were from female (68.67%) while the remaining was from male (31.32%). Dysuria was the most common clinical presentation followed by fever and abdominal pain. Diabetes and urogenital instrumentation were the major risk factors for UTI. Among the 166 urine samples which showed significant colony count, 152 (91.56%) of specimen showed pus cells in wet film examination. Among the gram-negative en- teric bacilli high prevalence of resistance was observed against Ampicillin, Cefotaxime, Ciprofloxacin, Nalidixic acid and co- trimoxazole. 44% of isolates were detected to produce ESBL among the gram negative bacteria. Carbapenemase production was seen in 13 (11.71%) isolates. Among the 32 Enterococcus isolates 14 (43.75%) were resistant to High level Gentamicin, 2 (6.25%) were resistant to High level Streptomycin while 12 (37.50%) of isolates were resistant to both of the antimicrobial drugs. Among the 16 Staphylococcus species, 8 (50%) were MRSA. KEYWORDS- MRSA, Antimicrobial resistance, UTI, ESBL, Gram-negative bacteria -------------------------------------------------IJLSSR----------------------------------------------- INTRODUCTION Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are one of the most common types of bacterial infections in humans occurring both in the commu- nity and health care settings. UTI ranks the highest among the most common reasons that compel an individual to seek medical attention [1] . Today it represents one of the most common diseases encountered in medical practices, affecting people of all ages, from the neonate to the geriatric age group [2] . Received: 07 November 2015/Revised: 26 November 2015/Accepted: 18 December 2015 The term urinary tract infection (UTI) denotes several distinct entities with the common feature of significant Pyuria and Bacte- riuria [3] . The causative pathogen profile varies from region to region, but Escherichia coli remain the most common causative pathogen. The sensitivity of uropathogens to different drugs va- ries in different areas, and changes with time. This necessitates periodic studies of the causative uropathogens and their antibiotic sensitivity pattern [4] . UTIs are often treated with different broad-spectrum antibiotics when one with a narrow spectrum of activity may be appropriate because of concerns about infection with resistant organisms. Fluoroquinolone are preferred as initial agents for empiric ther- apy of UTI in area where resistance is likely to be of concern. [5,6] This is because they have high bacteriological and clinical cure rates, as well as low rates of resistance, among most common uropathogens. [7-9] The extensive uses of antimicrobial agents Corresponding Address * Nazreen khan Department of Microbiology Integral Institute of Medical Sciences & Research Lucknow, India E-mail: knazreeniim2@gmail.com Research Article (Open access)
  • 2. Int. J. Life. Sci. Scienti. Res., Volume 2, Issue 1 http://ijlssr.com IJLSSR © 2015 All rights are reserved have invariably resulted in the development of antibiotic resis- tance, which, in recent years, has become a major problem worldwide. [10] Current knowledge on antimicrobial susceptibility pattern is essential for appropriate therapy. Emerging multidrug resistant strains is of major concern to treat UTI. This study has been designed to evaluate the profile of isolates causing UTI and their resistance to various antimicrobial agents. MATERIALAND METHODS It was a cross- sectional study of clinically suspected cases of Urinary tract infection attending the OPD and IPD of Integral Institute of Medical Sciences and Research, Hospital. Urine sam- ples were sent to Microbiology laboratory for bacteriological examination. Study period was 6 months from January 2015 – June 2015. The data was analyzed using SPSS Statistical version 16.0. Proportions for categorical variables were compared using chi-square test and t- test. In all cases p- value less than 0.05 was taken as statistically significant. Patients not willing to give their consent were excluded from the study. Adults and children with the suspected symptoms of UTI were included in the study. One specimen per patient was taken. Only patients with significant bacteriuria (≥105 cfu/ml) were in- cluded for the microbiological analysis. From the clinically suspected patients of UTI, midstream clean catch specimen of urine from both the male and female was col- lected in a sterile, screw-capped, wide mouthed universal con- tainer. Wet mount preparation was made from all urine samples to look for the presence of pus cells and epithelial cells. The film was usually observed with the high power (40X) dry objective of the microscope. The bacterial count in the urine sample was de- termined by Semi-quantitative culture method using 3.26 mm internal diameter standard loop (Hi- Media laboratories limited). [11] The urine samples were inoculated on a plate of cysteine lactose electrolyte deficient (CLED) agar, MacConkey agar or Blood agar by using the calibrated loop and were incubated aerobically for 18-24 hours at 37˚C. Urinary isolates from symptomatic UTI cases were identified on the basis of colony morphology, Gram’s staining, catalase test, oxidase test, coagulase test and standard biochemical tests. Mueller Hinton agar was used for Antimicrobial sensitivity test- ing of isolates. Isolated colonies were inoculated in a suitable broth medium and incubated at 35-37˚C for 4-6 hours. The densi- ty of the organism in broth was adjusted to approximately 107 cfu/ml by comparing its turbidity with 0.5 McFarland opacity standard tubes. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed by Kirby Baur's disc diffusion method using appropri- ate antibiotic disk. Commercially available antibiotic disc of 6mm (Hi- Media laboratories limited) were used. Antibiotic disc were selected according to bacterial isolates. In the present study the antibiotic disc tested were [12] . For Enterobacteriaceae species Ampicillin (10µg), amoxicillin-clavulanic acid (20/10 µg), Ampicillin/sulbactum (10/10µg), Cefotaxime (30µg), Cefotaxime/clavulanic acid (30/10µg), Ceftriaxone (30µg), Ceftriaxone/sulbactam (30/15µg), Co-trimoxazole (25 µg), Tetracycline (30µg), Amikacin (30µg), Gentamicin (10µg), Nalidixic acid (30µg), Ciprofloxacin (5µg), Levofloxacin (5µg), Ceftazidime (30µg), Ceftazidime/clavulanic acid (30/10µg), Cefixime (5µg), Cefepime (30µg), Ticarcillin/clavulanic acid (75/10µg), piperacillin/tazobactam (100/10µg), tobramycin (10µg), netillin (30µg), Aztreonam(30µg), Imipenem/cilastin (10/10µg), Meropenem (10µg), Ertapenem (10µg), Norfloxacin (10µg), Nitrofurantoin (300 µg). For Pseudomonas species Aztreonam (30µg), Ticarcillin (75µg), Ticarcillin/clavulanic acid (75/10µg), piperacillin (100µg), piperacillin/tazobactam (100/10µg), Imipenem/cilastin (10/10µg), Ceftazidime (30µg), Ceftazidime/clavulanic acid (30/10µg), Meropenem (10µg), to- bramycin (10µg), Amikacin (30µg), Gentamicin (10µg), Ciprof- loxacin (5µg), Polymixin B (300 units). For Staphylococcus and Streptococcus species Penicillin (10units), amoxicillin-clavulanic acid (20/10 µg), Am- picillin/sulbactum (10/10µg), Co-trimoxazole (25 µg), Tetracyc- line (30µg), Cefprozil (30µg), Cefaclor (30µg), Cefoxitin (30µg), Gentamicin (10µg), Amikacin (30µg), Ciprofloxacin (5µg), Levofloxacin (5µg), Gemifloxacin (5µg), Vancomycin (30µg), Linezolid (15µg), Teicoplanin (30µg), Norfloxacin (10µg), Nitro- furantoin (300 µg). For Enterococcus species Penicillin (10units), Ampicillin (10µg), Linezolid (15 µg), vancomycin (30µg), high level Gentamicin (120µg), high level
  • 3. Int. J. Life. Sci. Scienti. Res., Volume 2, Issue 1 http://ijlssr.com IJLSSR © 2015 All rights are reserved streptomycin (300 µg), Ciprofloxacin (5µg), Levofloxacin (5µg), Tetracycline (30µg), Doxycycline (30µg), Teicoplanin (30µg), Norfloxacin (10µg), and Nitrofurantoin (300 µg) Phenotypic detection of antibiotic resistance MRSA was detected by using Cefoxitin disk (30µg) [12] . Isolates resistant to third generation cephalosporin were tested for ESBL production by double disk synergy test method by using Cefotax- ime (30µg) and Cefotaxime- clavulanic acid (30µg/10µg) and Ceftazidime (30µg) and Ceftazidime- clavulanic acid (30µg/10µg) [12] . Isolates resistant to Meropenem were tested for MBL production by EDTA disk synergy method [13] . Detection of High level Aminoglycoside resistance was done by using High level Gentamicin disk (120µg) and High level Streptomycin disk (300µg) [12] . RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Total 453 samples were included in the present study to estimate the prevalence of Antimicrobial resistance in patients suffering from Urinary tract infection attending the OPD and IPD of IIMS&R, hospital. Of the 453 processed samples 166 samples showed significant colony count of pathogens. Among the total processed urine samples, 166 (36.64%) of them yielded significant growth of a bacterial isolates. Remaining 287 samples had either contaminated or had a very low bacterial count or were sterile urine. Table 1: Details of samples with significant colony count Significant Growth OP= 63 IP= 103 Culture Positive Percentage 37.95% 62.04% 36.64% Number 63 103 166 Highest samples were received from the Department of Medicine (49.39%) followed by O&G (22.89%), Pediatrics (13.25%), Surgery (6.02%), Skin & VD (3.61%), MICU (1.8%), ICU (2.4%) and TB & chest (0.6%). Figure 1: Pie-chart showing details of samples from different Departments Dysuria (95.18%) was the most common clinical presentation followed by fever (89.15%) and abdominal pain (68.67%). Diabetes (28.91%) and urogenital instrumentation (16.26%) were the major risk factors for UTI. Among the 166 urine samples which showed significant colony count, 152 (91.56%) of speci- men showed pus cells in wet film examination. The patients were between the ages 0 and 85 years. UTIs were reported in total 52 (31.32%) males and 114 (68.67%) females. Females of the reproductive age group (between 21 and 50 years) constituted 41.56% of the total patients with UTI. However, males (50 years or more) had a higher incidence of UTI (44.23%) compared to the females of the same age group (14.91%). Table 2: Age and sex distribution of Urinary tract infection cases AGE GROUPS (YEARS) MALE n (%) FEMALE n (%) 0-10 8 (15.38) 12 (10.52) 11-20 0(0) 16 (14.03) 21-30 5 (9.6) 28 (24.77) 31-40 9 (17.30) 25 (21.92) 41-50 7 (13.46) 16 (14.03) 51-60 11 (21.1) 12 (10.52) 61-70 8 (15.38) 5 (4.38) 71-80 2 (3.84) 0(0) 81-90 2 (3.84) 0(0) TOTAL 52 (31.32%) 114 (68.67%) t (8 d.f.) 1% 4.642** 3.824** ** = p<0.01; highly significant From the 166 isolates, 111 were Gram negative while 55 were Gram positive bacteria. Escherichia coli (E. coli) was the most common organism isolated accounting for 82 (49.39%) and the second highest organism was Enterococcus (n=32; 19.27%)
  • 4. Int. J. Life. Sci. Scienti. Res., Volume 2, Issue 1 http://ijlssr.com IJLSSR © 2015 All rights are reserved followed by Staphylococcus species (n=16; 9.63%) and Klebsiel- la species (n=13; 7.83%). The other bacterial isolates obtained in the study were Citrobacter, Acinetobacter, Proteus, Pseudomo- nas, Enterobacter, Streptococcus and CoNS. Table 3: Frequency and distribution of bacterial isolates from UTI cases ISOLATES n (%) IP OP E. coli 82 (49.39) 49 33 Enterococcus species 32 (19.27) 24 8 S. aureus 16 (9.63) 12 9 Klebsiella species 13 (7.83) 7 6 Pseudomonas species 6 (3.61) 5 1 CoNS 5 (3.01) 1 4 Citrobacter species 4 (2.4) 2 2 Acinetobacter species 3 (1.8) 1 2 Proteus species 2 (1.2) 1 1 Streptococcus species 2 (1.2) 1 1 Enterobacter species 1 (0.6) 1 0 TOTAL 166 103 63 Table 4: Antibiotic susceptibility pattern of Gram positive isolates (% Resistance) Table 5: Antibiotic susceptibility pattern of Gram negative isolates (% Resistance) OR- GAN- ISM ANTIBIOTICS TESTED PENI NI- CIL- LIN TE- TRA- CY- CINE NOR- FLO XA- CIN NI- TRO- FU- RAN- TOIN CE- FO- XITIN CI- PRO- FLOX ACIN VA NC O- MY CIN Staphy- lococ- cus species (n=21) 18 (85.7 %) 6 (28.57 %) 5 (23.8 %) 1 (4.76% ) 9 (42.8% ) 6 (28.5%) 0 Strep- tococ- cus species (n=2) 0 1 (50%) 0 0 0 0 0 Entero- coccus species (n=32) 15 (46.8 %) 15 (46.8% ) 16 (50%) 24 (75%) 1 (3.1%) _ 0 ANTIBIOTICS E. coli (n=82) klebsiella species (n=13) Pseudomonas species (n=6) Citrobacter spe- cies (n=4) Proteus Species (n=2) Enterobacter species (n=1) Acinetobacter Species (n=3) Ampicillin 71 (86.5%) 11 (84.61%) _ 1 (25%) _ 1 (100%) 1 (33.3%) Piperacillin tazo- bactum 11 (13.4%) 2 (15.38%) 3 (50%) 0 _ 1 (100%) 0 Ceftazidime 43 (52.43%) 9 (69.23%) 2 (33.3%) 1 (25%) _ 1 (100%) 1 (33.3%) Cefotaxime 57 (69.51%) 11 (84.61%) _ 1 (25%) _ 1 (100%) 0 Gentamicin 14 (17.07%) 3 (23.07%) 3 (50%) 1 (25%) _ 1 (100%) 0 Amikacin 9 (10.97%) 2 (15.38%) 2 (33.3%) 0 _ 1 (100%) 0 Norfloxacin 30 (36.58%) 2 (15.38%) 3 (50%) 0 _ 1 (100%) 1 (33.3%) Ciprofloxacin 59 (71.95%) 5 (38.46%) 3 (50%) 1 (25%) _ 1 (100%) 0 Nalidixic acid 74 (90.24%) 8 (61.53%) _ 1 (25%) _ 1 (100%) 2 (66.6%) Co- trimoxazole 57 (69.51%) 6 (46.15%) _ 1 (25%) _ 1 (100%) 1 (33.3%) Nitrofurantoin 9 (10.97%) 4 (30.76%) 5 (83.33%) 1 (25%) 2 (100%) 1 (100%) 2 (66.6%) Meropenem 44 (53.65%) 5 (38.46%) 3 (50%) 1 (25%) _ 1 (100%) 0 Imipenem 2 (2.43%) 0% 1 (16.6%) 0 0 0 0
  • 5. Int. J. Life. Sci. Scienti. Res., Volume 2, Issue 1 http://ijlssr.com IJLSSR © 2015 All rights are reserved From the total gram negative bacterial isolates (n=111), 29.72% of them were simple β- lactamase producer, 39.63% were ESBL producer, 11.71% were Carbapenemase (MBL TYPE) producers. Table 6: Resistance pattern of Gram negative isolates Out of the total Enterococcus species (32) isolated, 14 (43.75%) were resistant to High level Gentamicin (HLG), 2 (6.25%) were resistant to High level of Streptomycin (HLS), while 12 (37.50%) of isolates were resistant to both of the Aminoglycosides. Table 7: Aminoglycoside resistance pattern of Ente- rococcus isolates SAMINOGLYCOSIDE RESISTANCE PATTERN n (%) IP OP HLS-R 2 (6.25) 1 1 HLG-R 14 (43.75) 9 5 Out of the total Staphylococcus aureus (16) isolated, 8 were Me- thicillin resistant (MRSA). Table 8: Methicillin resistance pattern in S. aureus isolates SENSITIVITY PATTERN n (%) IP OP Methicillin resistant 8 (50) 6 2 Methicillin sensitive 8 (50) 5 3 DISCUSSION Urinary tract infections are one of the most common types of bacterial infections occurring in humans [14] . This study was undertaken to identify pathogenic bacteria responsible for Uri- nary tract infection and to determine their Antimicrobial resis- tance pattern. Out of the total urine samples, 166 (36.64%) samples yielded significant colony count, 237 (52.31%) samples were sterile, 30 (6.62%) samples showed multiple isolates (samples grossly contaminated during collection) and 20 (4.41%) samples showed insignificant colony count.In a study done by [15] , in their study 62% samples were sterile, 26.01% showed significant growth, 2.3% showed insignificant growth and 9.6% were found conta- minated. While in the study of [16] , 547 samples (18.5%) yielded significant bacteriuria; 2323 samples (79.1%) showed no growth and 74 samples (2.4%) showed mixed growth. It showed that culture positivity rate varies from area to area. In this study, the prevalence of UTI was recorded higher in females than in males. Females were at higher risk for with UTI showing 114 (68.67%) of urine culture positivity whereas the male subjects showed only 52 (31.32%) of culture positivity. Similar observations were recorded by [17] and [18] . Females of the reproductive age group (between 21 and 50 years) constituted 41.56% of the total patients with UTI. However, males (50 years or more) had a higher incidence of UTI (44.23%) compared to the females of the same age group (14.91%). The distribution of isolates according to different age group is signifi- cantly associated with Gender (p=0.001). Approximately same findings were reported by [19] , women of the reproductive age group formed the main group of adult patients with UTI (42.34% of all UTI detected in women of age 21-50 years), UTIs were reported in 62.42% of females and in 37.67% of males. It has been extensively reported that adult women have a higher prevalence of UTI than men, principally owing to anatomic and physical factors. We found dysuria in 158 (95.18%) patients as the most common clinical presentation of UTI followed by fever 148 (89.16%) and abdomen pain in 114 (68.67%) cases. Diabetes 48 (28.91%) was the most common associated risk factor with the UTI and Cathe- terization (16.26%) was the second most common associated risk factor in the present study. Similar findings were reported by [20] . It was seen in the present study that among the 166 samples with significant colony count, 152 (91.56%) of them were having abundant pus cells, While the 26 (9.05%) of culture negative samples showed the presence of pus cells but no growth. Patients with sign and symptoms of UTI sometimes produce samples of urine that show pus cells but do not yield a significant growth of bacteria on routine culture. The explanation may be that the patient has been taking antibiotics prescribed on a previous occasion. Alternatively, there may be an infection with an organism that does not grow on the media normally used for routine investigations. In such cases it is important to consider RESISTANCE TYPE n (%) IP OP β-LACTAMASE PRODUCER 33 (29.72) 15 18 ESBL PRODUCER 44 (39.63) 30 14 CARBAPENEMASE PRODUCER 13 (11.71) 12 1
  • 6. Int. J. Life. Sci. Scienti. Res., Volume 2, Issue 1 http://ijlssr.com IJLSSR © 2015 All rights are reserved genitourinary tuberculosis or gonococcal infection and infection with nutritionally exacting or anaerobic bacteria [21] . But many patients with frequency and dysuria do not have a bacterial infec- tion of the bladder, nor significant numbers of bacteria in their urine (abacterialpyuria). Their condition is known as non-bacterial urethiritis or cystitis, or the urethral syndrome, the cause of which may be urethral or bladder infection with a chlamydia, Ureaplasma, Trichomonas or virus which often remain unrecognized [22] . This study showed that E. coli 82 (49.39%) was the commonest pathogen causing UTI and it was similar to the findings of [15; 16; 23] . The antimicrobial sensitivity pattern of the E. coli isolates in our study was similar to previous studies done in India. The compari- son of resistance patterns of uropathogenic E. coli in various studies is shown in Table 9. Table 9: Comparison of resistance patterns of uro- pathogenic E. coli in various studies from India and other parts of the world AUTHORS COUNTRY YEAR AMP CIP COT NIT Colodner et al [24] Israel 2001 66 6 26 1 Gupta et al [25] India 2002 74 38 70 12 Farrell et al [26] UK 2003 S48.7 2.3 --- 3.7 Andrade et al [27] Latin Amer- ica 2006 53.6 21.6 40.4 6.6 Biswas et al [28] India 2006 63.6 35.1 40.3 9.3 Garcia et al [29] Spain 2007 58.7 22.7 33.8 5.7 Akram et al [19] India 2007 _ 69 76 80 Kothari & Sagar [30] India 2008 85.3 72 74 24.4 Niranjan & Malini [16] India 2014 88.4 75 64.2 17.9 Present study (Lucknow) India 2015 86.58 71.95 69.51 10.97 E. coli and Klebsiella species isolates are equally resistant to Ampicillin (86.5% and 84.6% respectively) while for Co- tri- moxazole. E.coli is more resistant (69.5%) than Klebsiella (46.1%) in this region. Indian isolates showed higher resistance against Ampicillin and Co- trimoxazole than the isolates from USA (39.1% and 18.6%) [31-32] . Nitrofurantoin has been used for more than five decades for the treatment of uncomplicated cystitis and it was found to remain active against most of the uropathogens. Recent data suggests that Nitrofurantoin has retained a good amount of sensitivity (90.98%), both against ESBL producers and non-ESBL producers.[33] In this study, 44 (39.63%) out of all gram negative isolates were found to produce ESBL. 35.13% of E.coli isolates were ESBL producers, followed by 2.7% of Klebsiella species. It might be possible that the high level of multi-drug resistance was most probably due to production of extended spectrum beta lactamases in these isolates [34] . Overall Imipenem resistance was 16.6% for Pseudomonas species and 2.4% for E. coli, whereas, other isolates of uro-pathogen were found to be sensitive to Imipenem. Among a total of 55 (49.5%) Meropenem resistant gram negative bacilli, we found 7 (12.7%) of E.coli, 4 (7.27%) of Klebsiella species and 2 (3.6%) of Pseudomonas species as carbapenemase produc- ing isolates. They were confirmed as MBL by EDTA double disk synergy test. Carbapenems have a broad spectrum of antibacterial activity, and these are resistant to hydrolysis by most β-lactamases including extended spectrum β-lactamases (ESBL) and AmpC β-lactamases [35] . In this study frequency of Enterococcus species in urinary tract infection was 32 (19.27%), the second most common isolate of this study. The overall prevalence of high level resistance to any Aminoglycoside among the study isolates was 37.5%. HLAR Enterococci were first reported in France in 1979 and since then have been isolated from all the continents [36; 37] reported preva- lence rate of high level Gentamicin resistance in Enterococci varying from 1% to 49% in the 27 European countries studied. Resistance to Methicillin is documented in 8 (50%) of 16 Staphy- lococcus isolates. In this study, though all gram positive isolates were sensitive to vancomycin, a watchful vigilance is required for emergence of Vancomycin resistance in view of recent reports of reduced susceptibility to S. aureus to Vancomycin [38] . The susceptibility patterns seen in our study seem to suggest that it is absolutely necessary to obtain sensitivity reports before initi- ation of antibiotic therapy in cases of suspected UTI. CONCLUSION E. coli was the predominant bacterial pathogen of Urinary tract infection in IIMS & R, Lucknow. Study showed high resistance
  • 7. Int. J. Life. Sci. Scienti. Res., Volume 2, Issue 1 http://ijlssr.com IJLSSR © 2015 All rights are reserved among uropathogenic E.coli to Ampicillin, Cephalosporins and Fluoroquinolones. High level of resistance among gram negative isolates were seen to commonly used antimicrobial agents such as Ampicillin, Cefotaxime, Nalidixic acid, Co-trimoxazole and Ciprofloxacin. ESBL production was seen in 44 (39.63%) isolates, out of the 111 Gram negative isolates. Carbapenemase production was seen in 13 (11.71%) isolates by EDTA-DST, out of 111 Gram- negative isolates. Among the 32 Enterococcus isolates 14 (43.75%) were resistant to High level Gentamicin, 2 (6.25%) were resistant to High level Streptomycin while 12 (37.50%) of isolates were resistant to both of the Aminoglyco- sisdes. Among the 16 Staphylococcus species, 8 (50%) were MRSA. REFERENCES [1] Kolawale AS, Kolawale OM, Kandaki-Olukemi YT, Babatunde SK, Durowade KA, Kplawale CF. Prevalence of urinary tract infec- tions among patients attending Dalhatu Araf Specialist Hospital, Lafia, Nasarawa State, Nigeria. Int J Med Medical Sci, 2009; 1:163- 7. [2] Kunin CM. Urinary tract infections in females. Clin Infect Dis, 1994; 18:1-12. [3] Johnson CC. Definitions, classification and clinical presentation of UTI. Med Clin of North America, 1991; 75.241-252. [4] Singhal A, Sharma R, Jain M, Vyas L. Hospital and community isolates of uropathogens and their antibiotic sensitivity pattern from a tertiary care hospital in North West India. AnnMed Health Sci Res, 2014; 4:51-6. [5] Schaeffer AJ: The expanding role of fluoroquinolones. Am J Med, 2002; 113(Suppl 1A):45S-54S. [6] Biswas D, Gupta P, Prasad R, Singh V, Arya M, Kumar A: Choice of antibiotic for empirical therapy of acute cystitis in a setting of high antimicrobial resistance. Indian J Med Sci, 2006; 60(2):53-8. [7] Goldstein FW: Antibiotic susceptibility of bacterial strains isolated from patients with community-acquired urinary tract infections in France. Multicentre Study Group. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis, 2000; 19:112-117. [8] Gupta V, Yadav A, Joshi RM: Antibiotic resistance pattern in uropathogen. Indian J Med Microbiol, 2002; 20:96-98. [9] Tankhiwale SS, Jalgaonkar SV, Ahamad S, Hassani U: Evaluation of extended spectrum beta lactamase in urinary isolates. Indian J Med Res, 2004; 120:553-556. [10] Kumar MS, Lakshmi V, Rajagopalan R: Related Articles, Occur- rence of extended spectrum beta-lactamases among Enterobacteri- aceae spp. isolated at a tertiary care institute. Indian J Med Microbiol, 2006; 24(3):208-11. [11] Mackie & McCartney Practical Medical Microbiology, 14th edition; 2012: Churchill Livingstone; 84-90. [12] Clinical and Laboratory Standard Institute. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing. 24nd informational supple- ment; 2014 (M100-S24), (3):110. [13] Franklin C, Liolios L, Peleg AY. Phenotypic detection of carbape- nem susceptible MBL- producing gram negative bacilli in the Clinical laboratory. J Clin Microbiol 2006; 44(3):139-44. [14] Al-Sweih N, Ja,mal W, Rotimi VO. Spectrum and antibiotic resis- tance of uropathogens isolated from hospital and community patients with urinary tract infections in two large hospitals in Kuwait. Med Princ Pract, 2005; 14:401-7. [15] Mandal J, Srinivas Acharya N, Buddhapriya D, Parija SC. Antibiot- ic resistance pattern among common bacterial uropathogens with a special reference to ciprofloxacin resistant Escherichia coli. Indian J Med Res, 2012; 136:842-849. [16] Niranjan V & Malini A. Antimicrobial resistance pattern in Escherichia coli causing urinary tract infection among inpatients. Indian J Med Res, 2014; 139:945-948. [17] Astal Z, Sharif F, Manama A. Antibiotic resistance of bacteria associated with community-acquired urinary tract infections in the southern area of the Gaza Strip. J Chemother, 2002; 14: 259-64. [18] Khalifa BHA, Khedher M. Epidemiological study of Klebsiella spp. uropathogenic strains producing extended-spectrum beta lactamase in a Tunisian University Hospital, 2009. Pathol Biol (Paris), 2012; 60:e1-e5. [19] Akram M, Shahid M, Khan AU. Etiology and antibiotic resistance patterns of community acquired urinary tract infections in JNMC hospital Aligrah, India. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob, 2007; 6: 4. [20] Eshwarappa M, Dosegowda R, Vrithmani Aprameya I, Khan MW, Kumar PS, Kempegowda P. Clinico-microbiological profile of uri- nary tract infection in south India. Indian j nephrol, 2011; 21-1. [21] Collins LE, Clarke RW, Maskell R. Streptococci as urinary pathogens. Lancet, 1986; 2:479-481. [22] Stamm WE, Wagner KF, Amsel R et al. causes of the acute urethral syndromein women. New England Journal of Medicine, 1980; 303: 409-415. [23] Sharma I, Paul DJ. Prevalence of community acquired urinary tract infections in Silchar Medical College. Indian j med sci, 2012; 66:11-12. [24] Colodner R, Keness y, Chazan B, Raz R. Antimicrobial susceptibil- ity of community-acquired uropathogens in northern Israel. Int J Antimicrob Agents, 2001; 18:189-92.
  • 8. Int. J. Life. Sci. Scienti. Res., Volume 2, Issue 1 http://ijlssr.com IJLSSR © 2015 All rights are reserved [25] Gupta V, yadav A, Joshi RM. Antibiotic resistance pattern in uropa- thogens. Indian J Med Microbiol, 2002; 20:96-8. [26] Farrell DJ, Morrissey I, De Rubeis D, Robbins M, Felmingham D. A UK multicentre study of the antimicrobial susceptibility of bac- terial pathogens causing urinary tract infection. J Infect, 2003; 46:94-100. [27] Andrade SS, Sader HS, Jones RN, Pereira AS, Pignatari AC, Gales AC. Increased resistance to first-line agents among bacterial pathogens isolated from urinary tract infections in Latin America: time for local guidelines? Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz, 2006; 101:741- 8. [28] Biswas D, Gupta P, Prasad R, Singh V, Arya M, Kumar A. Choice of antibiotic for empirical therapy of acute cystitis in a setting of high antimicrobial resistance. Indian J Med Sci, 2006; 60:53-8. [29] Garcia MI, Munoz Belido JL, Garcia Rodriguez JA. Spanish Coop- erative Group for the Study of Antimicrobial susceptibility of Community Uropathogens. In vitro susceptibility of community- acquired urinary tract pathogens to commonly used antimicrobial agents in Spain: a comparative multicenter study (2002-2004). J Chemother, 2007; 19:263-70. [30] Kothari A, Sagar V. Antibiotic resistance in pathogens causing community-acquired urinary tract infections in India: a multicenter study. J Infect Dev C tries, 2008; 2:354-8. [31] Vromen M, van der Van AJ, Knols AM, Stobberingh EE: Antimi- crobial resistance patterns in urinary tract isolates from nursing homes residents. Fifteen years of data reviewed. J Antimicrob Che- mother, 1999; 44:113-116. [32] Kahlmeter G: Prevalence and antimicrobial susceptibility of patho- gens in uncomplicated cystitis Europe. The ECO. SENS study. Int J Antimicrob Agents, 2003; 22:49-52. [33] Asha Pai KB, Rai R, Sanjeev H, Karnaker VK, Prasad K. Nitrofu- rantion: An alternative therapy for uncomplicated cystitis in the era of antimicrobial resistance. J Clin Diagn Res, 2011; 5:964-6. [34] Grover SS, Sharma M, Chattopadhya D, Kapoor H, Pasha ST, Singh G: Phenotypic and genotypic detection of ESBL mediated cephalosporin resistance in Klebsiella pneumoniae: emergence of high resistance against cefepime, the fourth generation cephalospo- rin. J Infect 2006, 53(4):279-88. [35] Payne DJ, Bateson JH, Gasson BC, Proctor D, Khushi T, Farmer TH, et al. Inhibition of metallo-ß-lactamases by a series of mercap- to acetic acid thiol ester derivatives. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 1997; 41:135-40. [36] Eliopoulos GM, Moellering RC. Antimicrobial combinations. In: Lorian V, editor. Antibiotics in Laboratory Medicine. Maryland: William and Wilkins, 1996; 330-96. [37] Schouten MA, Voss A, Hoogkamp-Korstanje JA. Antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of enterococci causing infections in Europe. The European VRE Study Group. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 1999; 43:2542-6. [38]Centre for Disease Control. Staphylococcus aureus with reduced susceptibility to vancomycin. US, 1997; MMWR 46:765-6.

Related Documents