Erythromycin Resistance in Bacterial Isolates from Patients with Respiratory Tract Infections in Ikere-Ekiti, Nigeria

O. Kolawole, O. Idris
{"title":"Erythromycin Resistance in Bacterial Isolates from Patients with Respiratory Tract Infections in Ikere-Ekiti, Nigeria","authors":"O. Kolawole, O. Idris","doi":"10.2478/ast-2020-0013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The occurrence of erythromycin resistance in bacteria causing respiratory tract infections varies among populations and is associated with inappropriate antibiotic usage. This study was undertaken to determine erythromycin resistance in bacterial isolates from patients with respiratory tract infections in Ikere-Ekiti. Bacteria were isolated from sputum specimens using standard microbiological protocols while the antibiotic susceptibility pattern of isolates was determined using the Kirby-Bauer method. Erythromycin resistance genes: mefA, ermA, and ermB were detected using multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Out of the 157 bacterial isolates identified using standard microbiological methods, Klebsiella spp. 40 (25%) was the most frequent followed by Staphylococcus aureus 34 (22%) and Proteus spp. 34 (22%) while Streptococcus spp., Escherichia coli, and Bacillus spp. had 19 (12%), 20 (13%), and 10 (6%) respectively. Most of the bacterial isolates were resistant to penicillin 148 (94%), cloxacillin 147 (93.6%), amoxicillin-clavulanic acid 141 (90%), erythromycin 141 (90%), and tetracycline 124 (79%). However, the isolates were least resistant to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 57 (36%). Out of the 48 bacterial isolates investigated using multiplex PCR amplification for erythromycin resistance genes, 10 (20.8%) were positive for mefA, 3 (6.3%) were positive for ermA, and 2 (4.2%) were positive for ermB. The association between the presence of mefA, ermA, and ermB genes and erythromycin resistance was not significant (p=0.464). The presence of erythromycin resistant genes in pathogenic bacterial isolates from the respiratory tract was revealed in this study. Awareness of the risk of self-medication and abuse of antibiotics should be emphasized.","PeriodicalId":7998,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Science and Technology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Science and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/ast-2020-0013","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

Abstract The occurrence of erythromycin resistance in bacteria causing respiratory tract infections varies among populations and is associated with inappropriate antibiotic usage. This study was undertaken to determine erythromycin resistance in bacterial isolates from patients with respiratory tract infections in Ikere-Ekiti. Bacteria were isolated from sputum specimens using standard microbiological protocols while the antibiotic susceptibility pattern of isolates was determined using the Kirby-Bauer method. Erythromycin resistance genes: mefA, ermA, and ermB were detected using multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Out of the 157 bacterial isolates identified using standard microbiological methods, Klebsiella spp. 40 (25%) was the most frequent followed by Staphylococcus aureus 34 (22%) and Proteus spp. 34 (22%) while Streptococcus spp., Escherichia coli, and Bacillus spp. had 19 (12%), 20 (13%), and 10 (6%) respectively. Most of the bacterial isolates were resistant to penicillin 148 (94%), cloxacillin 147 (93.6%), amoxicillin-clavulanic acid 141 (90%), erythromycin 141 (90%), and tetracycline 124 (79%). However, the isolates were least resistant to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 57 (36%). Out of the 48 bacterial isolates investigated using multiplex PCR amplification for erythromycin resistance genes, 10 (20.8%) were positive for mefA, 3 (6.3%) were positive for ermA, and 2 (4.2%) were positive for ermB. The association between the presence of mefA, ermA, and ermB genes and erythromycin resistance was not significant (p=0.464). The presence of erythromycin resistant genes in pathogenic bacterial isolates from the respiratory tract was revealed in this study. Awareness of the risk of self-medication and abuse of antibiotics should be emphasized.
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
尼日利亚Ikere-Ekiti地区呼吸道感染患者分离细菌对红霉素的耐药性
引起呼吸道感染的细菌中红霉素耐药的发生在不同人群中存在差异,并与不适当的抗生素使用有关。本研究旨在确定从呼吸道感染患者中分离出的细菌对红霉素的耐药性。采用标准微生物学方法从痰标本中分离细菌,采用Kirby-Bauer法测定菌株的药敏模式。采用多重聚合酶链反应(PCR)检测红霉素耐药基因:mefA、ermA和ermB。在标准微生物学方法鉴定的157株细菌中,最常见的是克雷伯菌40(25%),其次是金黄色葡萄球菌34(22%)和变形杆菌34(22%),而链球菌19(12%),大肠杆菌20(13%)和芽孢杆菌10(6%)。大多数分离菌对青霉素148(94%)、氯西林147(93.6%)、阿莫西林-克拉维酸141(90%)、红霉素141(90%)、四环素124(79%)耐药。而对甲氧苄啶-磺胺甲恶唑耐药最少的菌株为57株(36%)。在48株红霉素耐药基因多重PCR扩增细菌中,mefA阳性10株(20.8%),ermA阳性3株(6.3%),ermB阳性2株(4.2%)。mefA、ermA和ermB基因的存在与红霉素耐药的相关性不显著(p=0.464)。本研究揭示了从呼吸道分离的病原菌中存在红霉素耐药基因。应强调对自我用药和滥用抗生素风险的认识。
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
Effects of Butylated HydroxylToluene and Vitamin E on Cadmium-Lead toxicity on the liver of rats Proline as an osmolyte modulates changes in morphological and physiological attributes of Capsicum annuum l. under water stress Effects of capacity building on rural women involvement in Climate Smart Agriculture initiatives in Rivers state, Nigeria Phytochemical, Proximate and in-vivo hypoglycemic Potential of Synsepalum dulcificum for Management of Diabetes mellitus in Nigeria Mn(II), Fe(III) and Ni (II) Complexes of Mixed Citric acid - Sulphamethoxazole: Synthesis, Characterization and Antibacterial activity
×
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