Author
Listed:
- Ugbo Emmanuel
- Anyamene Chris
- Orji Jerry
- Eluu Stanley
- Ukpai Grace
- Ogene Lilian
- Okata-Nwali Divinegift
Abstract
Extended-spectrum β-lactamases (ESBLs) continue to be a major challenge in clinical setups worldwide, conferring resistance to the expanded-spectrum cephalosporins. The present study focused on the prevalence of ESBL-producing E. coli clinical isolates among patients diagnosed of Wound and Urinary Tract Infections attending Federal Teaching Hospital Abakaliki. A total of one hundred and ninety two clinical isolates of E. coli was studied for their susceptibility patterns to cephalosporin antibiotics and detection of ESBL producers was carried out by double disc synergy test (DDST) and Brilliance ESBL Agar. Of the 192 isolates tested for their antibiogram, 19(9.9%), 41(21.4%), 132(68.7%); 48(25.0%) and 144(75.0%) isolates were from wound, high virginal swab, urine, male and female respectively. The isolates showed higher susceptibility to cefepime (a 4th-generation cephalosporin) with percentage susceptibility of 78.9, 85.4 and 73.5 to the isolates from wound, HVS and urine respectively. Higher resistance was recorded among the 3rd-generation cephalosporins which include Cefotaxime (63.4%), Ceftriaxone (57.9%), and Cefpodoxime (73.7%). Among the resistant isolates of E. coli, 20 isolates were phenotypically confirmed ESBL producers by the DDST and Brilliance ESBL Agar methods. Ten (10) ESBL producing E. coli was confirmed using DDST method whereas 15 ESBL producing E. coli was confirmed using the Brilliance ESBL Agar. Brilliance ESBL Agar was found to be better than DDST in the detection of ESBLs. Continuous monitoring of drug resistance and regulating the use of cephalosporin drugs in our hospitals is vital for proper infectious disease management and treatment.
Suggested Citation
Ugbo Emmanuel & Anyamene Chris & Orji Jerry & Eluu Stanley & Ukpai Grace & Ogene Lilian & Okata-Nwali Divinegift, 2016.
"Phenotypic Characterization and Comparative Study on ESBL-producing E. coli of Clinical Origin,"
International Journal of Sciences, Office ijSciences, vol. 5(02), pages 27-31, February.
Handle:
RePEc:adm:journl:v:5:y:2016:i:2:p:27-31
DOI: 10.18483/ijSci.908
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:adm:journl:v:5:y:2016:i:2:p:27-31. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Staff ijSciences (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.