Slime production among uropathogenic bacterial isolates: Evaluating different phenotypic detection methods.

Authors

  • Pallavi Sayal Department Of Microbiology, BPS,GMC(W) Khanpur kalan,Sonepat,Haryana
  • Raminder Sandhu Department of Microbiology, BPS,GMC(W), Khanpur Kalan, Sonepat, Haryana
  • Kanwardeep Singh Department of Microbiology, GMC,Amritsar,Punjab.
  • Pushpa Devi Department of Microbiology, GMC,Amritsar,Punjab

Keywords:

Bacterial Biofilm, uropathogens, TCP, urinary catheters

Abstract

Background: Biofilms are surface associated bacterial communities surrounded by a matrix of Exo -polymers. Biofilms contribute to the development of chronic urinary infections, refractory to antibiotic therapy.

Methods: This prospective study was done on 150 non-repetitive urine samples from catheterized patients. Semi-quantitative bacterial culture was performed and isolates were identified by standard biochemical tests. Biofilm formation was detected by Congo Red Agar Method (CRA), Tube Method (TM) and Tissue Culture Plate Method (TCP).

Result: Significant bacteriuria was observed among 113/150(74.66%) samples. Gram negative bacteria (GNB) were predominant isolates 101(89.38%) and among GNB, Escherichia coli was commonly isolated 30/101(29.70%).Non E.coli Enterobacteriaceae (NECE) isolates include Klebsiella spp. 25/101(24.75%), Citrobacter spp 07/101(6.93%), Proteus spp. 17/101(16.83%) among non-fermenter bacteria Pseudomonas aeruginosa 21/101(20.79%).Gram positive (GPB) constitute 12/113(10.61%) among total isolates. Biofilm producers detected by TCP 79(69.91%), TM 60(53.09%) and CRA 11(9.73%) respectively.

Conclusion: Detection of biofilms can be recommended for recurrent and recalcitrant infections before institution of empirical antibiotics. TCP method with good reproducibility and specificity which can be used for detection of biofilms in resource limited settings.

 

 

DOI: 10.21276/apalm.2017.1064

Author Biographies

Pallavi Sayal, Department Of Microbiology, BPS,GMC(W) Khanpur kalan,Sonepat,Haryana

Dr.Pallavi Sayal M.D(Microbiology) Demonstrator,Department of Microbiology, BPS,GMC(W),Khanpur Kalan,Sonepat,Haryana.

Raminder Sandhu, Department of Microbiology, BPS,GMC(W), Khanpur Kalan, Sonepat, Haryana

Assistant Professor,Department Of Microbiology,BPS,GMC(W),Khanpur Kalan, Sonepat,Haryana

Kanwardeep Singh, Department of Microbiology, GMC,Amritsar,Punjab.

Associate Professor,Department of Microbiology,GMC,Amritsar,Punjab.

Pushpa Devi, Department of Microbiology, GMC,Amritsar,Punjab

Professor And HOD,

Department Of Microbiology,GMC,Amritsar,Punjab.

References

1. Donlan RM. Biofilms; Microbial life on surface. Emerg Infect Dis. 2002;8(9):881-90.
PMID:12194761.
2. Mah TF, O'Toole GA.Mechanism of Biofilm resistance to antimicrobial agents. Trends Microbiol. 2001 ;9(1);34-39. [PMID:11166241].
3. Costerton JW, Lewandowski Z, Caldwell DE, Korber DR, Lappin Scott HM. Microbial biofilms. Annu Rev Microbiol. 1995;49:711-45.
4. Bordi and de Bentzmann: Hacking into bacterial biofilms: a new therapeutic challenge. Annals of Intensive Care. 2011 1:19. (doi:10.1186/2110-5820-1-19)
5. Collee JG, Duguid JP, Fraser AG, Marmion B P, Simmons A. Laboratory strategy in the diagnosis of infective syndrome. In Collee JG, Fraser AG, Marmion BP, Simmons A, editors. Mackie & McCartney Practical Medical Microbiology. 14thed. New Delhi: Elsevier, a division of Reed Elsevier India Pvt. Ltd. 2006. P. 53-94.
6. Christensen GD, Simpson WA, Younger JA, Baddour LM, Barrett FF, Melton DM et al. Adherence of Coagulase negative Staphylococci to plastic tissue cultures: a quantitative model for the adherence of Staphylococci to medical devices. J. Clin.Microbiol.1985;22:996-1006. [PMID: 3905855 PMCID:PMC271866].
7. Christensen GD, Simpson Wa, Bisno AL, Beachey EH. Adherence of slime producing strains of Staphylococcus epidermidis to smooth surfaces. Infect. Immunol.1982 ;37(1):318-26. [PMID:6179880].
8. Freeman DJ, Falkiner FR, Keane CT. New method for detecting slime production by coagulase negative staphylococci. J Clin Pathol.1989 ;42(8):872-4. [PMID:2475530].
9. Abdallah NMA, Elsayed SB, Mostafa MY, Elgohary GM. Biofilm forming bacteria isolated from urinary tract infection, relation to catheterization and susceptibility to antibiotics. Int J Biotech and mol bio research.2011;2(10):172-8.
10. Jain P, Parada JP, David A, Smith LG. Overuse of the indwelling urinary tract catheter in hospitalized medical patients. Arch. Intern. Med. 1995 :155 (13);1425–9. [PMID:7794092].
11. Yassien M, Khardori N. Interaction between biofilms formed by Staphylococcus epidermidis and quinolones. Diag Microbiol Infect Dis.2001;40:79-89. [PMID:11502373].
12. Bakke A, Digranes A. Bacteriuria in patients treated with clean intermittent catheterization. Scand J Infect Dis. 1991;23(5):577-82. [PMID:19865057].
13. Teshager L, Asrat D, Tamiru S. Catheterized and non-catheterized urinary tract infections among patients attended at Jimma University Teaching Hospital, Southwest, Ethiopia. Ethiop Med J. 2008 Jan;46(1):55-62. [PMID:18711990].
14. Nickel JC, Costerton JW, McLean RJ, Olson M. Bacterial biofilms: influence on the pathogenesis, diagnosis and treatment of Urinary tract infections. J Antimicrob Chemother 1994;33 Suppl A:31-41.[PMID:7928835].
15. Lee JH, Kim SW, Byung Y, Wan D, Cho WH. Factors That Affect Nosocomial Catheter-Associated Urinary Tract Infection in Intensive Care Units: 2-Year Experience at a Single Center. Korean J Urol. 2013;54:59-65. [doi:10.4111/kju.2013.54.1.59]
16. Hassan SKR. Studies on urinary tract infections in Bangladesh. Med J. 1991;20:29-32.
17. Niveditha S, Pramodhini S, Umadevi S, Kumar S, Stephen S. The isolation & the biofilm of uropathogens in the patients with CA-UTI. J Clin Diag Res. 2012 ;6(9):1478-83. [doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2012/4367.2537].
18. Mohamed E, Shalakany HE. Detection of biofilm formation in uropathogenic bacteria. Egypt J Med Microbiol.2015;24(1):49-57.
19. Turkyilmaz S, Ezkiizmirliler S. Detection of Slime factor production and antibiotic resistance in Staphylococcus strains isolated from various animal clinical samples. Turk J Vet Anim Sci. 2006;30:201-6.
20. Hassan A, Usman J, Kaleem F, Omalr M, Khalid A, Iqbal M.Evaluation of different detection methods of biofilm formation in clinical isolates. Braz J Infect Dis.2015;15(4):305-11. [PMID:21860999]
21. Nabajit D. Comparison of tissue culture plate, tube method and Congo Red Agar method for the detection of biofilm formation by coagulase negative Staphyloccus isolated from non clinical samples. Int J Curr Microbiol App Sci.2014;3(10):810-5.
22. Tayal R, Baveja S, De Anuradha. Comparison of phenotypic methods for detection of Biofilm production in uropathogens in tertiary care hospital in India. Int J Curr Microbiol App Sci.2015;4(9):840-9.
23. Pahraj I, Sistla S, Parija SC. Virulence factors in clinical and commensal isolates of Enterococcus species. Ind J Path Microbiol. 2013;56(1):24-30. [doi: 10.4103/0377-4929.116144] [PMID:23924554].
24. Golia S, Hittinahalli V, Karjigi S K, Reddy K M. Correlation between biofilm formation of uropathogenic Escherichia coli and its antibiotic resistance pattern. J Evol Med Den Sci.2012;1(3):166-75.

Downloads

Additional Files

Published

19-02-2017

How to Cite

1.
Sayal P, Sandhu R, Singh K, Devi P. Slime production among uropathogenic bacterial isolates: Evaluating different phenotypic detection methods. Ann of Pathol and Lab Med [Internet]. 2017 Feb. 19 [cited 2025 May 18];4(1):A48-53. Available from: https://pacificejournals.com/journal/index.php/apalm/article/view/apalm1064

Issue

Vol. 4 No. 1 (2017)

Section

Original Article

License

Copyright (c) 2017 Pallavi Sayal, Raminder Sandhu, Kanwardeep Singh, Pushpa Devi

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access at http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html).