P. aeruginosa was isolated most of the from urine, sputum and other materials. The majority often serovars were O1, O6 and O11. The most of isolates produced fluorescin (58.54%), while 22.94% producted pyocianin and 21.21% both pigments.
Introduction/Aim. Pseudomonas aeruginosa (P. aeruginosa) is the most common cause of wound infections, following the disruption of the skin or mucous membranes integrity. The aim of this study was to analyze of the presence P. aeruginosa in wound swabs, antibiotics susceptibility testing, determination of the minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of antibiotics, testing of the metallo-?-lactamases (MBLs) production, isolates serotyping and analysis of the most common serotypes resistance. Methods. A total of 90 outpatients and 55 intpatients wound swabs were cultivated. Wound swabs were taken from the patients with wound infections symptoms. Antibiotics susceptibility testing was performed to: meropenem, imipenem, piperacillin-tazobactam, ceftazidime, cefepime, amikacin, gentamicin, netilmicin, ofloxacin, ciprofloxacin and colistin (HiMedia). Polyvalent and monovalent antisera for agglutination (Biorad) were used in P. aeruginosa agglutination. Results. P. aeruginosa was isolated from 36.55% wound swabs (36.66% of the inpatients wounds and 36.36% of the outpatients). The analyzed isolates showed the highest degree of sensitivity to colistin (100%) and meropenem (93.44%) and the lowest to cefepime (19.54%). The majority of the inpatients isolates had 12 ?g/mL (28.57%) MIC for piperacillin-tazobactam and 16 ?g/mL (28.57%) for the outpatients. The most common MICs for ciprofloxacin were 0.19 ?g/mL (31.81%) for the nosocomial isolates, and 0.25 ?g/mL (28.57%) for the outpatients? ones. The most common MICs for amikacin of the nosocomial isolates were 6 ?g/ml (40.9%), and for the outpatients ones 4 ?g/mL (33.33%). Five (9.43%) isolates produced MBLs. The most common serotypes were P11 (22.64%), P6 (15.09%) and P1 (11.32%). Conclusion. Neither the increased presence of P. aeruginosa was noticed in wounds swabs, nor the antibiotic resistance in the nosocomial isolates compared to those from outpatients. The analyzed isolates had the higest sensitivity to colistin and meropenem, and the lowest to cefepime. [Projekat Ministarstva nauke Republike Srbije, br. TR 31080]
Introduction. Bacteria from the root canal can penetrate beyond the apex and cause acute or chronic inflammation in periapical region. The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence of different forms of apical periodontitis and to determine the presence of Gram-negative anaerobic bacteria in samples taken from the root canal and oral cavity. Materials and Methods. Study included 45 patients, 30 adults and 15 children. Three samples from the root canal and one from the oral cavity from the patients with apical periodontal inflammation were taken and grown on Schaedler agar enriched with 5% sheep blood, Schaedler agar enriched with 5% sheep blood and 20% bile, Schaedler agar enriched with 5 % sheep blood supplemented with 7.5 mg/L vancomycin and thyoglycolate broth (Biomerieux®). Final identification of bacteria was carried out by the API A system (Biomerieux®). Results. Based on clinical history and radiographic findings chronic granulomatous apical periodontitis was diagnosed in 62.2% of respondents, fibrous form in 24.4% and acute inflammation in 13.3% of cases. Porphyromonas gingivalis was isolated in 60% of the samples from the root canal and 20% of samples from oral cavity. In addition Prevotella intermedia (20%), P. melaninogenica, P. oralis, P. dentalis, Bacteroides ovatus, B. fragilis and others were also isolated. Conclusion. The most common form of the apical periodontal inflammation was chronic inflammation in the form of granuloma. Most frequently isolated bacterium was Porphyromonas gingivalis. In the samples taken from the root canal significantly more anaerobic bacteria were isolated compared to the samples from oral cavity
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.