A comparative study on prevalence of uropathogens and their antibiogram in diabetics and non-diabetics attending a tertiary care hospital

Tanmay Anne, V. Suryadevara, Anuradha B.
{"title":"A comparative study on prevalence of uropathogens and their antibiogram in diabetics and non-diabetics attending a tertiary care hospital","authors":"Tanmay Anne, V. Suryadevara, Anuradha B.","doi":"10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20240843","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Urinary tract infection (UTI) is a significant problem in both diabetics and non-diabetics. High glucose may create a culture medium for growth of the virulent organisms. Diabetics are at greater risk for developing complications of UTI. Extensive and improper use of antibiotics has caused widespread anti-microbial resistance among uro-pathogens. Indiscriminate use of antibiotics during Covid-19 pandemic might lead to more resistant uro-pathogens which might further complicate the treatment of UTI. This study will help to determine resistance patterns of common uro-pathogens, which is essential for proper patient care.\nMethods: Clean voided midstream urine samples were collected from 91 patients (67 diabetic and 24 non-diabetic). Urine cultures were performed using semi-quantitative technique and pathogens were identified using phenotypic methods. Those with colony forming units (CFU) ≥105 CFU/ml were subjected to antibiotic sensitivity testing by Kirby-Bauer disk diffusion method and the isolates were classified as sensitive, and resistant according to CLSI guidelines.\nResults: E. coli (53.84%) and Enterococci (29.67%) were the most commonly isolated pathogens of UTI in both diabetics and non-diabetics. E. coli resistance to imipenem was statistically more in diabetics when compared to non-diabetics (p=0.012). Resistance patterns of other organisms were similar in both the groups.\nConclusions: E. coli was the most common pathogen isolated in both groups followed by Enterococci and Klebsiella. Diabetics showed statistically significant higher resistance (100%) to imepenem than non-diabetics. Other organisms isolated in this study did not show any statistically significant difference in their antibiogram.","PeriodicalId":14210,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Research in Medical Sciences","volume":"37 18","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Research in Medical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20240843","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Urinary tract infection (UTI) is a significant problem in both diabetics and non-diabetics. High glucose may create a culture medium for growth of the virulent organisms. Diabetics are at greater risk for developing complications of UTI. Extensive and improper use of antibiotics has caused widespread anti-microbial resistance among uro-pathogens. Indiscriminate use of antibiotics during Covid-19 pandemic might lead to more resistant uro-pathogens which might further complicate the treatment of UTI. This study will help to determine resistance patterns of common uro-pathogens, which is essential for proper patient care. Methods: Clean voided midstream urine samples were collected from 91 patients (67 diabetic and 24 non-diabetic). Urine cultures were performed using semi-quantitative technique and pathogens were identified using phenotypic methods. Those with colony forming units (CFU) ≥105 CFU/ml were subjected to antibiotic sensitivity testing by Kirby-Bauer disk diffusion method and the isolates were classified as sensitive, and resistant according to CLSI guidelines. Results: E. coli (53.84%) and Enterococci (29.67%) were the most commonly isolated pathogens of UTI in both diabetics and non-diabetics. E. coli resistance to imipenem was statistically more in diabetics when compared to non-diabetics (p=0.012). Resistance patterns of other organisms were similar in both the groups. Conclusions: E. coli was the most common pathogen isolated in both groups followed by Enterococci and Klebsiella. Diabetics showed statistically significant higher resistance (100%) to imepenem than non-diabetics. Other organisms isolated in this study did not show any statistically significant difference in their antibiogram.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
关于在一家三级医院就诊的糖尿病患者和非糖尿病患者中尿路病原体流行率及其抗生素图谱的比较研究
背景:无论是糖尿病患者还是非糖尿病患者,尿路感染(UTI)都是一个严重的问题。高血糖可为致病菌的生长提供培养基。糖尿病患者出现尿路感染并发症的风险更大。抗生素的广泛和不当使用导致尿路病原体普遍产生抗微生物耐药性。在 Covid-19 大流行期间滥用抗生素可能会导致更多尿路病原体产生耐药性,从而使尿路感染的治疗更加复杂。这项研究将有助于确定常见尿路病原体的耐药性模式,这对正确护理病人至关重要:方法:收集 91 名患者(67 名糖尿病患者和 24 名非糖尿病患者)的清洁中段排尿样本。采用半定量技术进行尿液培养,并使用表型方法鉴定病原体。对菌落形成单位(CFU)≥105 CFU/ml的菌株采用柯比鲍尔盘扩散法进行抗生素敏感性检测,并根据 CLSI 指南将分离菌株分为敏感菌株和耐药菌株:结果:大肠杆菌(53.84%)和肠球菌(29.67%)是糖尿病患者和非糖尿病患者最常分离到的UTI病原体。据统计,糖尿病患者对亚胺培南的耐药性高于非糖尿病患者(P=0.012)。两组患者对其他微生物的耐药性模式相似:结论:大肠杆菌是两组患者中最常见的病原体,其次是肠球菌和克雷伯氏菌。糖尿病患者对亚培南的耐药性(100%)明显高于非糖尿病患者。本研究中分离出的其他微生物在抗生素图谱上没有任何明显的统计学差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The role of roxithromycin in the treatment of respiratory tract infections: a comprehensive overview Vacuum assisted closure as adjuvant therapy for a mangled upper extremity injury Disseminated annular granuloma: a rare dermatological manifestation of diabetes Establishing normal gallbladder volume: a comparative study of dual energy computed tomography and ultrasound measurements in a North Indian population A comparative study of chlorhexidine-coated tulle gras versus polyurethane adhesive film for donor site wound dressing in split skin graft cases
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1