STUDY ON PHENOTYPIC DETECTION OF ESBL IN GRAM NEGATIVE BACTERIAL ISOLATES IN A TERTIARY CARE HOSPITAL IN BANGALORE

K.T. SANGEETHA¹, VIVEK HITTINAHALLI², P.R. LYRA³*
¹Department of Microbiology, East Point College of Medical Sciences and Research Centre, Rajiv Gandhi University of Health sciences, Jayanagar, Bengaluru, Karnataka 560041
²Department of Microbiology, East Point College of Medical Sciences and Research Centre, Rajiv Gandhi University of Health sciences, Jayanagar, Bengaluru, Karnataka 560041
³Department of Microbiology, East Point College of Medical Sciences and Research Centre, Rajiv Gandhi University of Health sciences, Jayanagar, Bengaluru, Karnataka 560041
* Corresponding Author : drlyrapr@gmail.com

Received : 10-03-2018     Accepted : 14-03-2018     Published : 30-03-2018
Volume : 10     Issue : 3       Pages : 1049 - 1051
Int J Microbiol Res 10.3 (2018):1049-1051
DOI : http://dx.doi.org/10.9735/0975-5276.10.3.1049-1051

Keywords : Extended spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL), Gram negative bacteria, Phenotypic confirmatory test, Cephalosporins
Academic Editor : Vasudha C L
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : Author thankful to Rajiv Gandhi University of Health sciences, Jayanagar, Bengaluru, Karnataka 560041
Author Contribution : All author equally contributed

Background: Extended spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL) producing gram negative organisms particularly the multi-drug resistant strains have become a major global health problem. Aims: The present study was aimed at determining the prevalence of extended spectrum β-lactamase (ESBLs) production in gram negative bacterial isolates obtained from various clinical isolates and to detect their antibiotic sensitivity pattern. Material and Methods: A total of 173 gram negative isolates obtained from various clinical specimens were processed by conventional methods and the ESBL detection was done by phenotypic confirmatory disc diffusion test along with the routine susceptibility testing recommended by CLSI. Results: 82 (47.4%) among the 173 gram negative isolates were ESBL producers. The most common ESBL producing organism was E.coli (53.08%). The isolates from pus (59.61%) showed the maximum ESBL production. Carbepenems were found to the most effective drug against ESBL producers. Conclusion: The high rate of ESBL production along with high degree of antibiotic co-resistance among the ESBL strains in our study emphasizes on the need for routine surveillance of ESBL among gram negative isolates using the phenotypic confirmatory test which can help the clinicians in early and effective disease management.

1. Bradford P.A. (2001) Clin. Microbiol Rev.,14, 933–951.
2. Shaikh S., Fatima J., Shakil S., Rizvi S.M.D. and Kamal M.A. (2015) Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences, 22(1), 90–101.
3. Barguigua A., El Otmani F., Talmi M., Bourjilat F., Haouzane F., Zerouali K., et al. (2011) JMedMicrobiol., 60(Pt9),1344–52.
4. Kumar et al. (2014) Infectious Diseases: Research and Treatment, 7; 1–8.
5. Chaudhary U. and Aggarwal R. (2004) Indian J Med Microbiol., 22,75-80.
6. Paterson D.L. and Bonomo R.A. (2005) ClinMicrobiol Rev., 18, 657–686.
7. Nathisuwan S., Burgess D.S. and Lewis II J.S. (2001) Pharmacotherapy, 21(8), 920-928.
8. Win W.C., Allen S.D., Janda W.M., Koneman E.W., Procop G.W., Schreckenberger P.C., Woods G., editors. 6th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; Enterobacteriaceae; 2006. Colour atlas and text book of diagnostic microbiology, 211–302.
9. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing; 26th informational supplement Wayne, PA: National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards; 2016 (M100-S26).
10. Shiju M.P., Yashavanth R. and Narendra N., (2010) Detection of Extended Spectrum Beta-Lactamase Production and Multidrug Resistance in Clinical Isolates of E.Coli and K. Pneumoniae in Mangalore, 2010, Jun;4(3), 2442-2445.
11. Jacoby G.A. and Sutton L. (1991) Antimicrob Agents Chemother., 35,164–9.
12. Shashwati N., Kiran T. and Dhanvijay A.G. (2014) J Nat Sc Biol Med, 5,30-5
13. Sageerabanoo S., Malini A., Mangaiyarkarasi T. and Hemalatha G. (2015) J Nat Sc Biol Med., 6,383-7.
14. Rao S.P., Rama P.S., Gurushanthappa V., Manipura R. and Srinivasan K. (2014) J Lab Physicians, 6, 7-13.
15. Linda Rose Jose. (2017) IOSR Journal of Dental and Medical Sciences (IOSR-JDMS), 16.8, 48-51
16. Dutta H., Nath R. and Saikia L. (2014) Indian J Med Res, 139,643-5.
17. Rudresh S.M. and Nagarathnamma T. (2011) Indian J Med Res., 133, 116–8.
18. Das N. and Borthakur A.K. (2012) Chron Young Sci., 1, 53–6.