Premlatha and Sajjanar: Detection of biofilm formation, extended spectrum beta lactamase production and their correlation with antibiotic resistance among uropathogenic Escherichia coli


Introduction

Urinary tract infections (UTI) is one of most important causes of morbidity and mortality.1 Escherichia coli is most common organism causing UTI. Subsets of fecal E.coli that can enter colonize urinary tract and cause infection are known as uropathogenic Escherichia coli (UPEC).1 According to Kass concept growth of >105 organisms per millilitre from properly collected clean catch midstream urine sample indicates significant bacteriuria.2 Biofilm is a group of microorganisms encased in an exopolymer coat.3 It is considered pathogenic determinant which allows strains to persist a long time in genitourinary tract and interfere with bacterial eradication.4, 5 It causes antibiotic resistance by limitation of antibiotic diffusion through matrix, transmission of resistance genes, expression of efflux pumps, inactivation by change in concentration of metallic ions.6, 7 Extended spectrum beta lactamase constitute growing class of plasmid mediated beta lactamases. These enzymes hydrolyse oxyamino beta lactams. In gram negative pathogens beta lactamase production remains most important contributing factor for beta lactam resistance. 8

Hence the current prospective analysis of UPEC was undertaken to know their antimicrobial susceptibility pattern, detection of biofilm and ESBL production and their correlation with antibiotic resistance for the period of 1 year with UTI in a tertiary care hospitals has been undertaken.

Materials and Methods

The study was carried out in the Department of Microbiology, attached to McGann hospital, Shimoga Institute of Medical Sciences, Shimoga. The study was conducted during the period from January 2016 to December 2016 from clean catch midstream urine samples of both in-patient and out-patient departments and first 100 Escherichia coli isolates which were isolated from samples were considered for study.

Isolation and Identification of Escherichia coli

On day 1-Urine sample was examined by wet mount preparation for the presence of pus cells, red blood cells, urinary casts, epithelial cells. These samples were processed by Standard loop technique (A semiquantitative method). A loopful (0. 001 ml) of uncentrifuged urine sample was inoculated onto the surface of blood agar and MacConkey agar. Plates were then incubated at 37 degree celcius aerobically for 24hrs.On day 2 Positive urine culture was determined by significant bacteriuria. (count > 105 /ml in a carefully taken and promptly examined sample). The colonies were Lactose fermenting colonies on MacConkey media, Lack of cytochrome oxidase activity, Positive catalase test, Gram negative bacilli on gram stain, Motile bacilli, IMViC + + - -(Indoletest, Methylredtest, Voges-Proskauer, Citrate test) Glucose, lactose, mannitol, maltose (but not sucrose) are fermented with production of acid and gas The organisms isolated were identified as Escherichia coli based on their colony morphology, Gram stain and relevant standard biochemical methods.9, 10

Antimicrobial susceptibility testing

Antibiotic susceptibility testing was carried out by Kirby Bauer Disk Diffusion method. Fosfomycin (200µg), Gentamicin (10μg), Nitrofurantoin (300μg), Cotrimoxazole (1.25/23.75μg) Norfloxacin (10µg), Aztreonam (30µg), Ceftazidime (30µg), Cefotaxim (30µg), Amikacin (30μg), Amoxiclavulanicacid (30μg), Ciprofloxacin (5µg) Levofloxacin (5 µg), Imipenem (10 µg), Piperacillin-Tazobactam (100:10 μg).11

Detection of extended spectrum βeta lactamase production

1.Phenotypic screening test for detection of ESBL production -E.coli isolates were screened for resistance to 2 Cephalosporins: Ceftazidime (30µg) and Cefotaxime (30µg) by Kirby Bauer disk diffusion test. Isolates that displayed resistance to one or both of these antibacterials were considered positive for screening test 2.Phenotypic confirmatory test for detection of ESBL production-E.coli isolates positive on screening test was further confirmed by using both Ceftazidime (30µg)/ Ceftazidime-Clavulanic acid (30µg/10µg) and Cefotaxime (30µg)/ Cefotaxime- Clavulanicacid (30µg/10µg) disks. An increase in zone diameter by ≥5mm around the disk with Cephalosporin and Clavulanic acid versus the zone around disks with Cephalosporin alone was interpreted as POSITIVE as per CLSI guidelines. On Day 3: The final identification of E.coli and their antibiotic susceptibility pattern was noted and on Day 4: Confirmatory test result for ESBL production by the E.coli isolates was noted.11

Detection of biofilm formation by tube method

Biofilm production was estimated qualitatively for E.coli isolates by tube method as described by Christensen et al. Procedure: Glass test tube containing Brain Heart Infusion broth was inoculated with a loopful of pure culture of E.coli isolate and was incubated aerobically at a temperature of 35 C for a period of 2 days After incubation for 48hrs, the supernatant was discarded and the glass tube was stained by 1% safranine solution for 7 minute. The glass tube was then washed with distilled water for 3 times and dried. Result: A positive result was defined as the presence of a layer of stained material adhered to the inner walls of the tube.12, 13

Detection of biofilm formation by Microtitre-plate method

Isolates were grown overnight in Brain Heart Infusion broth at 370 C.200µl of this culture suspension was used to inoculate in the wells of a sterile 96-well flat bottomed polystyrene microtitre plate. Negative control well contained broth only. The plate was covered and incubated aerobically for 24 hours at 37C. After 24hr of incubation, the content of each well was washed three times with 250 μl of sterile physiological saline. Then the plate was dried in inverted position. Plate was then stained for 5 min with 1% safranine. Excess stain was rinsed off by placing the plate under running tap water. The OD of each well was measured at 578 nm using ELISA reader. The cut-off optical density (ODc) for the microtitre-plate is defined as three standard deviations above the mean OD of the negative controls. For the purpose of comparative analysis of test results, the adherence capabilities of the test strains were classified into the following four categories: non-adherent (0), weakly (+), moderately (++), or strongly (+++) adherent, based upon the ODs of bacterial films. All the tests were carried three times and the results were averaged. Strains were classified as follows OD ≤ ODc -non-adherent, ODc < OD ≤ 2 x ODc- weakly adherent, 2 x ODc < OD ≤ 4 x ODc- moderately adherent,4 x ODc < OD –strongly adherent. 14, 15

Result

The present study was conducted from January 2016 to December 2016 in Department of microbiology, attached to McGann hospital SIMS, Shimoga. First 100 E.coli which were isolated were included in the study. Out of 100 isolates 68(68%) isolates were from female patients and 32(32%) were from male patient.

Antibiotic susceptibility pattern: In our study E.coli was highly sensitive to nitrofurantoin (100%), fosfomycin (100%), imipenem (77%). Moderately sensitive to cotrimoxazole (61%), amikacin (47%), aztreonam (53%), piperacillin tazobactam (41%). Least sensitive to cefotaxim (25%), ceftazidime (32%), norfloxacin (20%), ampicillin-sulbactam (12%), ciprofloxacin (15%), levofloxacin (12%), amoxyclavulanicacid (15%).

Detection of ESBL production: Screening method-Out of 100 E.coli isolates 83(83%) were ESBL positive by screening method. Confirmatory test- A total of 83 isolates were subjected to ESBL confirmatory test by combined disc diffusion method .Among 83 isolates 80 were ESBL positive by confirmatory method.

Detection of biofilm formation.: Out of 100 isolates 63(63%) were biofilm producers by tube method and 79(79%) were biofilm producers by microtiterplate method.

Total number of ESBL producers (%)N=100 80(80%),Number of biofilm producers showing ESBL Production (%),N=70 70(100%),Number of biofilm non- producers showing ESBL production (%),N=30 13(43.3%)

All the biofilm producers were ESBL producers and 43.3% biofilm non producers were ESBL producers.

Antibiotic resistance in ESBL producers and ESBL non producers:. ESBL producers resistance (%), Pipercillin Tazobactam (77.5%), gentamycin (71.25%), amikacin (58.75%), cotrimoxazole (62.5%), norfloxacin (93.75%), amoxiclavulanic acid (86.25%), imipenam (75%), levofloxacin (93.75%), nitrofurantoin ( 0%), fosfomycin (0%), ciprofloxacin (93.75%), aztreonam (50%) ESBL non producers resistance (%) Pipercillin Tazobactam (50%), gentamycin (55%), amikacin (45%), cotrimoxazole (35%), norfloxacin (80%), amoxiclavulanic acid (65%), imipenam (50%), levofloxacin (80%), nitrofurantoin (0%), fosfomycin (0%), ciprofloxacin (80%), aztreonam (50%).

Antibiotic resistance in biofilm producers and biofilm non producers: Biofilm producers resistance (%): Gentamycin (73.41%), cefotaxime (87.34%), ceftazidime (87.34%), amikacin (69.6%), cotrimoxazole (72.15%), norfloxacin (88.60 %), imipenem (78.48%), nitrofurantoin (0), fosfomycin (0), ciprofloxacin (75.94%), aztreonam (74.68% c). Biofilm non producers resistance (%): Gentamycin (52.38%), cefotaxime (76.19%), ceftazidime (76.19%), amikacin (57.14%), cotrimoxazole (66.66%), norfloxacin (85.71%), imipenem (71.42%), nitrofurantoin (0), fosfomycin (0), ciprofloxacin (57.14 %), aztreonam (66.66%).

Table 1

Sex distribution

Sex

Number

Percentage

Male

32

32%

Female

68

68%

Total

100

100%

Table 2

Antibiotic susceptibility pattern of the UPEC isolates

Antibiotic

Sensitive (%)

Resistance (%)

Gentamicin

43(43)

57(57)

Ampicillin-Sulbactam

12(12)

88(88)

Nitrofurantoin

100(100)

0

Fosfomycin

100(100)

0

Aztreonam

53(53)

47(47)

Norfloxacin

20(20)

80(80)

Ciprofloxacin

15(15)

85(85)

Levofloxacin

11(11)

89(89)

PiperacillinTazobactam

41(41)

59(59)

Amikacin

47(47)

53(53)

Ceftazidime

32(32)

68(68)

Cefotaxim

25(25)

75(75)

Imipenem

77(77)

23(23)

Cotrimoxazole

61(61)

39(39)

Amoxiclavulanic acid

15(15)

85(85)

Graph 1

ESBL production by screening method and confirmatory method

https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/typeset-prod-media-server/2ffd51fa-1cd8-4e3e-bc19-b1695fa164bbimage1.png

Graph 2

ESBL Positive isolates

https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/typeset-prod-media-server/2ffd51fa-1cd8-4e3e-bc19-b1695fa164bbimage2.png

Table 3

Detection of biofilm formation of UPEC isolates by different methods

Test method

Biofilm producers

Tube method

63(63%)

Microtiter plate method

79(79%)

Table 4

ESBL production among biofilm producer and biofilm non-producer UPEC isolates

Total number of ESBL producers (%) N=100

Number of biofilm producers showing ESBL Production (%), N=70

Number of biofilm non- producers showing ESBL production (%), N=30

80(80%)

70(100%)

13(43.3%)

Table 5

Antibiotic resistance in ESBL producers and ESBL non producers

Antibiotics

ESBL producers resistance (%)

ESBL non producers resistance (%)

Piperacillin tazobactam

77.5

50

Gentamycin

71.25

55

Amikacin

58.75

45

Cotrimoxazole

62.5

35

Norfloxacin

93.75

80

Amoxyclavulanic acid

86.25

60

Imipenem

75

50

Levofloxacin

93.75

80

Nitrofurantoin

0

0

Fosfomycin

0

0

Ciprofloxacin

93.75

80

Aztreonam

50

50

Table 6

Antibiotic resistance in biofilm producers versus biofilm non producers

Antibiotics

Biofilm producers resistance (%)

Biofilm non producers resistance (%)

Ciprofloxacin

75.94

57.14

Norfloxacin

88.60

85.71

Gentamycin

73.41

52.38

Amikacin

69.6

57.14

Cotrimoxazole

72.15

66.66

Cefotaxim

87.34

76.19

Ceftazidime

87.34

76.19

Aztreonam

74.68

66.66

Imipenem

78.48

78.12

Fosfomycin

0

0

Nitrofurantoin

0

0

Discussion

Urinary tract infection (UTI) is the most common and a serious health problem both in the community and hospital settings each year worldwide.5 The ascending route infection accounts for more than 90% cases. Causative organisms are derived from fecal flora inhabiting the periurethral region. Urinary pathogens have shown a changed pattern of susceptibility to antibiotics because of biofilm formation and ESBL production resulting in an increase in resistance to commonly used antibiotics.6

In the present study out of 100 E.coli positive UTI cases 32(32%) were males and 68(68%) were females. According to study done by Chaterjee et al 50% isolates were from female patients and 50% isolates were from male patient, Rajani et al showed that 43.1% isolates were from male patient and 56.9% isolates were from female patient. Predominance in female is due to colonisation of urethra by colonic gram negative bacilli because of its proximity to anus, short length of urethra (about 4cm) & sexual intercourse (introduction of bacteria into bladder).16, 17

Antibiotic resistance is a growing threat worldwide. Studies from various parts of India have shown occurences of high rates of antimicrobial resistance among E.coli. In our study E.coli was highly sensitive to nitrofurantoin (100%), fosfomycin (100%), imipenem (77%). Moderately sensitive to cotrimoxazole (61%), amikacin (47%), aztreonam (53%), piperacillintazobactam (41%). Leastsensitiveto cefotaxim (25%), ceftazidime (32%), norfloxacin (20%), Ampicillinsulbactam (12%), ciprofloxacin (15%), amoxyclavulanic acid (15%).

According to study done by E.Sabharwal et al showed high sensitivity for nitrofurantoin (94.5%), imipenem (93.5%), fosfomycin (97.2%), cefotaxim (70.2%) moderately sensitive to gentamicin amikacin (56.7), ciprofloxacin (50.2%) least sensitive to norfloxacin (46.7%), cotrimoxazole (45.9%) and aztreonam (36.6%).18

According to study by Sultan et al 100% sensitivity was seen for fosfomycin, amikacin, imipenem and least sensitivity to norfloxacin (18%) and ceftriaxone (5.4%).18 Study done by V Niranjan et al showed high sensitivity for nitrofurantoin (82%), imipenem (98.9%), amikacin (82.6%).4 Study done by Mandira et al showed different results where sensitivity of nitrofurantoin (77.5%), cotrimoxazole (17.5%), gentamicin (62.5%), amikacin (72.5%) is different. Results of other studies are not in accordance with present study.19

Fosfomycin and nitrofurantoin have various advantages over other antibiotics which has led to their 100% sensitivity among UPEC isolates in our study.

Fosfomycin is broad-spectrum antibiotic and bactericidal that acts by inactivating the enzyme phosphoenolpyruvate synthetase, leading to disruption of bacterial cell-wall synthesis.18 Common side effects are diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, skin rash, heartburn, vaginitis, headache, chills and asthenia. Advantageous feature of low molecular weight and long half &#8209; life helps penetration of various tissues with ease, achieving the minimum inhibitory concentrations required to inhibit the growth of most pathogens.20

Nitrofurantoin used for the prophylaxis and treatment of uncomplicated cystitis. Increased emergence of antibiotic resistance has made nitrofurantoin a suitable for the treatment of UTI caused by multidrug-resistant pathogens. The mechanism of action requires enzymatic reduction within the bacterial cell and the reduced derivatives appear to be capable of binding to ribosomal proteins.21, 22 The fluoroquinolones susceptibility of urine pathogens, changing over the years, is influenced by factors such as the changing patient population and the extensive use and misuse of the antimicrobial agent as empirical treatment in UTI, which contribute to alterations in the microbial profile of urine isolates. 23

Use of fosfomycin and nitrofurantoin as the first line therapy contributes to a reduction in overall fluoroquinolone use thereby helping to reduce selection pressure for increased resistance to fluoroquinolones.23 In our study imipenem shows good sensitivity profile (77%). Carbapenems still remain as the antibiotic with highest sensitivity in ESBL E.coli. Doripenem is one of the newer carbapenem, which is advocated in complicated UTI. Aminoglycosides have least sensitivity according to our study. Parenteral administration and low safety profile especially among the elderly is the major drawback. This can be overcome by opting for single day dosing or by using in combination with other antimicrobial agents. 21, 23

In present study ESBL production among uropathogenic E.coli was detected in 80% of isolates. According to study done by Mandira et al 64.28% were ESBL producers. 19 Study done by Mahesh et al showed 56.2% were ESBL positive.24 According to various other studies very few UPEC isolates were ESBL producers and results are as follows: Rajani et al 39.66%, Shravani tadepalli et al 38%, Ponnuswamy et al 20.4%and Datta et al showed 21.4%.16, 25, 26, 27 These results are not in accordance with results of present study.

ESBL are mutation of various aminoacid among which mutation at position 238 wherein glycine is replaced by serine, alanine or aspartate is the most common. Mechanism of action is by structural remodelling of active site of beta-lactamases leading to hydrolysis of extended spectrum cephalosporins, all penicillins and monobactams. 16, 27

In our study biofilm detection showed better results with microtitre plate method (79%) as compared to tube method (63%). Study done by Shravani tadepalli et al showed detection of biofilm by tube method 32% and microtitre plate method 35%. 27 Some studies used only single method for biofilm detection. Study done by Bajpai et al showed biofilm formation 62% by tube method, Suman et al showed 92% biofilm formation by microtitre plate method and study by Ponnuswamy et al showed 57.40% biofilm formation by microtitre plate method. 27, 28, 29 Results of above studies are not in accordance with present study.

Biofilm production is high in our study compared to other studies.28 Biofilm are like intracellular pods that allow bacteria to outlast a strong host immune response to establish dormant reservoir of pathogens inside bladder cells. Re-emergence of bacteria from this reservoir causes recurrent infections. This also causes antibiotic resistance.27, 29

The resistance pattern of the isolates to various antibiotics among ESBL producers in comparison with ESBL non producers in our study was as follows: Pipercillin Tazobactam (77.5vs50), gentamycin (71.25vs55), amikacin (58.75 vs 45), cotrimoxazole (62.5 vs 35), norfloxacin (93.75 vs 80), amoxiclavulanic acid (86.25 vs 65%), imipenam (75 vs 50), levofloxacin (93.75vs 80), nitrofurantoin (0 vs 0), fosfomycin (0 vs 0), ciprofloxacin (93.75vs 80), aztreonam (50 vs 50) and correlated well with other studies. In the present study more number of UPEC isolates producing ESBL showed resistance to norfloxacin, ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin.

Similar study done by Ponnuswamy et al showed antibiotic resistance pattern between ESBL and non ESBL producers as follows: Pipercillin tazobactam (35 vs35), gentamycin (47 vs 42), amikacin (56 vs 40), cotrimoxazole (49 vs 46), norfloxacin (37 vs 35), amoxiclavulanic acid (86 vs 87), imipenem (8 vs 6), levofloxacin (17 vs 11), nitrofurantoin (53 vs 38). 26 Results are not in accordance with present study.

Another study done by Mandira et al showed antibiotic resistance pattern between ESBL and non ESBL producers as follows: gentamycin (50vs22), amikacin (22.2 vs 5.6), cotrimoxazole (94.5 vs 0), levofloxacin (27.8 vs 27.8), nalidixic acid (100vs0), ciprofloxacin (100 vs 0).19 Results are not in accordance with present study.

Study done by Bajpai et al showed antibiotic resistance pattern between ESBL and non ESBL producers as follows: Pipercillin Tazobactam (27.1 vs 41.2), gentamycin (31.3 vs 51.5), amikacin (12.5 vs 36.8), cotrimoxazole (98 vs 78), norfloxacin (83.4 vs 78), levofloxacin (68.8vs 73.6), nitrofurantoin (0 vs 22.2), aztreonam (93.4 vs 67.71).29

All the above mentioned studies show that there is increase percentage of antibiotic resistance among ESBL producers when compared to ESBL non producers. The present study also indicate that multidrug resistant ESBL isolates are widely prevalent. Multidrug resistance (MDR) due to ESBL which is a transferable drug resistance mediated via plasmids, resistance genes to other agents like fluoroquinolones, aminoglycosides and cotrimoxazole are also transferred by conjugation.26 This multidrug resistance leads to a change in the choice of empirical antimicrobial agents. Disadvantages of ESBL strains are it causes restriction of usage of beta-lactam and its usage in conditions like pregnancy where choice of antimicrobials is limited to beta-lactam antibiotics like cephalosporins ampicillin, which causes treatment failure.29

This study confirms that ESBL producing E.coli strains are notable cause of community onset infections especially in predisposed patients. This study proves statistically (p<0.01) that there is significant correlation between ESBL production and antibiotic resistance among the isolates.

The resistance pattern of the isolates to various antibiotics among biofilm producers in comparison with biofilm non producers in our study was as follows: Gentamycin (73.41% vs 52.38%), cefotaxime (87.34% vs 76.19%), ceftazidime (87.34% vs 76.19%), amikacin (69.6% vs 57.14%), cotrimoxazole (72.15% vs 66.66%), norfloxacin (88.60 % vs 85.71%), imipenem (78.48% vs 71.42%), nitrofurantoin (0 vs 0), fosfomycin (0 vs 0), ciprofloxacin (75.94 VS 57.14), aztreonam (74.68 VS 66.66).

Study done by Shravani tadepalli et al showed antibiotic resistance pattern among biofilm producers in comparison with biofilm non producers as follows: Ciprofloxacin(75% vs 45%), norfloxacin (75% vs 45%), gentamcin (52% vs 26%) amikacin (19% vs 5%), cotrimoxazole (68% vs 42%), amoxicillin (92% vs 87%), ceftazidime (76% vs 40%), cefotaxim (76% vs 35%), ceftriaxone (67% vs 28%).27

Study done by Bajpai et al showed antibiotic resistance pattern among biofilm producers in comparison with biofilm non producers as follows: Ciprofloxacin(81.8% vs 87.5%), Norfloxacin (81.8% vs 87.5%), gentamcin (9% vs 37.5%) amikacin (9% vs 12.5%), cotrimoxazole (63.6% vs 87.5%), ceftazidime (81.8% vs 87.5%), cefotaxim (72.7% vs 87.5%).29 In the present study antibiotic resistance was seen more among biofilm producing isolates when compared to biofilm non producing isolates. Multidrug resistance pattern of the biofilm producing isolates was seen in present study.

Biofilm is considered pathogenic determinant which allows strains to persist for long time in urinary tract and interfere with bacterial eradication which causes recurrent infections.30 Antibiotic resistance is mainly by limitation of antibiotic diffusion through matrix, transmission of resistance genes, inactivation by change in concentration of metallic ions by the biofilm formation.27, 31 This study proves statistically (p<0.01) that there is significant correlation between biofilm production and antibiotic resistance among the UPEC isolates.

Conclusion

Our study has demonstrated significant production of biofilm and extended spectrum betalactamase (ESBL) among the UPEC isolates from UTI patients of tertiary care hospital, SIMS, Shimoga. It also showed significant correlation between biofilm formation, ESBL production and antibiotic resistance. The present study established Biofilm producing UPEC and ESBL producing UPEC has led to the emergence of antibiotic resistance. Multidrug resistant strains leads to treatment failure, delayed clinical response, high morbity and mortality.

Most of the UPEC which were isolated in the study were found to be resistant to routinely used antibiotics. Data from our study shows fosfomycin and nitrofurantoin as an important treatment option for uncomplicated UTIs in the current era of increasing fluoroquinolone resistance among uropathogens. All the biofilm producers and ESBL producers which were isolated were multidrug resistant. Therefore, this is an important issue which has to be addressed by the policy makers, to formulate a strict antibiotic prescription policy.

Because the patterns of sensitivity of the microorganisms to the antibiotics vary over time and among different geographical areas, the empiric antibacterial therapy of the infections should be based on a local experience of the susceptibility and the resistance profile.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest in this paper.

Source of Funding

None.

References

1 

J Agarwal S Srivastava M Singh Pathogenomics of uropathogenic Escherichia coliIndian J Med Microbiol2012302141910.4103/0255-0857.96657

2 

P Preethishree R Rai KV Kumar KBA Pai UP Bhat Uropathogens and their antibiotic susceptibility pattern at a tertiary care hospitalInt J Curr Microbiol App Sci201651233110.20546/ijcmas.2016.51003

3 

N A Ghanwate Biofilm eradication studies on uropathogenic e.coli using ciprofloxacin and nitrofurantoinInt J Pharm Biomed Res20123212731

4 

V Niranjan A Malini Antimicrobial resistance pattern in Escherichia coli causing urinary tract infection among inpatientsIndian J Med Res201413969458

5 

M Akram M Shahid AU Khan Etiology and antibiotic resistance patterns of community-acquired urinary tract infections in J N M C Hospital Aligarh, IndiaAnn Clin Microbiol Antimicrob20076410.1186/1476-0711-6-4

6 

S Murugan P Devi P John Antimicrobial Susceptibility Pattern of Biofilm Producing Escherichia coli of Urinary tract InfectionCurr Res Bacteriol2011427380

7 

M Rijavec M Muller-Premru B Zakotnik Zgur-Bertok D. Virulence factors and biofilm production among Escherichia coli strains causing bacteraemia of urinary tract originJ of Med Micro2008571113293410.1099/jmm.0.2008/002543-0

8 

BC Metri P Jyothi VP Basavaraj Peerapur Basavaraj V. The Prevalence of ESBL among Enterobacteriaceae in a Tertiary Care Hospital of North Karnataka, IndiaJ Clin Diag Res2011534705

9 

WWC Topley Graham S Sir Wilson Topley and Wilson's Microbiology and Microbial Infections10th Edn.2Distributed in the United States of America by ASM PressLondon : Hodder Arnold ; Washington, D.C549617

10 

W Winn Allen S Janda W Koneman E Procop G Schreckenberger P Woods Koneman’s color atlas and textbook of diagnostic Microbiology6th Edn.Philadelphia. Lippincott, New York.20061443535

11 

Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). M-100-S25. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing CLSI approved standardClinical and Laboratory Standards InstituteWayne2015

12 

G D Christensen W A Simpson A L Bisno E H Beachey Adherence of slime producing strains of Staphylococcus epidermidis to smooth surfacesInfec Immu19823713182610.1128/iai.37.1.318-326.1982

13 

T Mathur S Singhal S Khan DJ Upadhyay T Fatma A Rattan Detection of biofilm formation among the clinical isolates of staphylococci: An evaluation of three different screening methodsIndian J Med Microbiol200624225910.4103/0255-0857.19890

14 

S Stepanovic D Vukovic V Hola G D Bonaventura S Djukic I Cirkovic Quantification of biofilm in microtitre plates:Overview for assessment of biofilm production by staphylococciAPIMS20071158891910.1111/j.1600-0463.2007.apm_630.x

15 

T Ruchi B Sujata D Anuradha Comparison of Phenotypic Methods for the Detection of Biofilm Production in UroPathogens in a Tertiary Care Hospital in IndiaIntJ Curr Microbiol App Sci2015498409

16 

C Rajani L Kasukurthi B Madhumati R Rajendran Prevalance of multidrug resistance and extended spectrum beta-lactamases among uropathogenic Escherichia coli isolates in a tertiary care hospital in South India:An alaraming trendCommunity Acquir Infect201521192410.4103/2225-6482.153861

17 

B Chatterjee S Kulathinal A Bhargava Y Jain R Kataria Anti-microbial resistance stratified by risk factor among Escherichia coli strains isolated from the urinary tract at A rural clinic in central indiaIndian J Med Microbiol200927432934

18 

ER Sabharwal R Sharma Fosfomycin:An Alternative Therapy for the Treatment of UTI Amidst Escalating Antimicrobial ResistanceJ Clin Diag Resr201591269

19 

M Mandira S Basu S Mukherjee M Majumdar Multidrug -Resistance and Extended Spectrum Beta-Lactamase Production in Uropathogenic E.Coli which were Isolated from Hospitalized Patients in KolkataJCDR20137344953

20 

A Sultan M Rizvi F Khan H Sami I Shukla H M Khan Increasing antimicrobial resistance among uropathogens: Is fosfomycin the answer?Urol Ann201571263010.4103/0974-7796.148585

21 

L Shakti B Veeraraghavan Advantage and limitations of nitrofurantoin in multi-drug resistant Indian scenarioIndian J Med Microbiol20153344778110.4103/0255-0857.167350

22 

J K Hatt P N Rather Role of bacterial biofilms in urinary tract infectionsCurr Top Microbiol Immunol20083221639210.1007/978-3-540-75418-3_8

23 

A Gupta B Chauhan J Pethani P Shah Fluoroquinolones resistance among uropathogens at a tertiary-care hospital, AhmedabadInt J Med Sci Public Health2016581583710.5455/ijmsph.2016.18112015257

24 

E Mahesh D Ramesh V A Indumathi MW Khan PS Kumar K Punith Risk factors for Community Acquired Urinary tract infection caused by ESBL-producing BacteriaJ Indian Acad Clin Med2010112717

25 

P Datta V Gupta S Sindhu Extended spectrum beta-lactamase positive uropathogenic ecoli-Epidemiological Factors and ResistanceBJMP201472718

26 

P Ponnusamy R Nagappan Extended Spectrum Beta -Lactamase, Biofilm-producing Uropathogenic Pathogens and Their Antibiotic Susceptibility Patterns from Urinary Tract Infection- An OverviewIntl J Microbiol. Res421018

27 

S Tadepalli S Prudhivi BR Myneni S Rao Biofilm formation in uropathogenic Escherichia coli isolates and its association with extended spectrum betalactamase production and drug resistanceSaudi J Pathol Microbiol201612604

28 

E Suman J Jose S Varghese MS Kotian Study of Biofilm Production in Escherichia coli Causing Urinary Tract InfectionIndian J Med Microbiol20052533056

29 

T Bajpai M Pandey M Varma G S Bhatambare Prevalence of extended spectrum beta-lactamase producing uropathogens and their antibiotic resistance profile in patients visiting a tertiary care hospital in central India:Implications on empiric therapyIndian J Pathol Microbiol20145734071210.4103/0377-4929.138733

30 

SM Soto F Marco E Guiral J Vila A Nikibakhsh Biofilm Formation in Uropathogenic Escherichia coli Strains: Relationship with Urovirulence Factors and Antimicrobial Resistance, Clinical Management of Complicated Urinary Tract Infection201110.5772/24626https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/19321

31 

M Sritharan V Sritharan Emerging problems in the management of infectious diseases: The biofilmsIndian J Med Microbiol20042231402



jats-html.xsl

© This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.


  • Article highlights
  • Article tables
  • Article images

Article History

Received : 16-07-2021

Accepted : 17-08-2021

Available online : 01-09-2021


View Article

PDF File   Full Text Article


Downlaod

PDF File   XML File   ePub File


Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

Article DOI

https://doi.org/10.18231/j.ijmmtd.2021.031


Article Metrics






Article Access statistics

Viewed: 152

PDF Downloaded: 40



Wiki in hindi