<p>Elevated Level of Imipenem-Resistant Gram-Negative Bacteria Isolated from Patients Attending Health Centers in North Gondar, Ethiopia</p>

Abstract

Background The frequent identification of resistant bacteria in hospitals constantly presents antimicrobial therapy with a challenge. Imipenem, once considered an extremely powerful antibiotic against multidrug-resistant bacterial infections, is losing its effectiveness. Its use in empirical therapy with inadequate or nonexistent antimicrobial stewardship programs has further triggered bacterial resistance in low-income countries. Therefore, this study aimed at identifying imipenem-resistant Gram-negative bacteria from patients who were referred to health centers in North Gondar, Ethiopia. Methods A total of 153 sputum samples were used to isolate Gram-negative bacteria. The isolates, which were resistant to imipenem, were identified by standard biochemical tests and 16S rRNA sequencing. The Kirby-Bauer disk diffusion method was used to determine the sensitivity or resistance of the isolate to diverse antimicrobial agents. Results The study identified 79 imipenem-resistant bacterial isolates from eight genera with clinically relevant microorganisms, including Acinetobacter baumannii (20.77%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (19.48%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (16.88%), and Serratia marcescens (14.28%). Overall, imipenem-resistant bacterial isolates were detected in 31 samples (20.26%). Additionally, a remarkably high level of resistance to most antibiotics was observed among isolates of Klebsiella pneumoniae and Acinetobacter baumannii . Gentamycin is the most active antibiotic against many of the isolates, while β-lactams appear to be less effective. Conclusion The study indicated that many Gram-negative bacteria were resistant to imipenem with parallel resistances to other antimicrobials. Hence, the prescription of imipenem within the region should be according to the antibiotic resistance profiles of the multi-drug resistant bacteria.

Prevalence and Trends of Carbapenem-Resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Acinetobacter Species Isolated from Clinical Specimens at the Ethiopian Public Health Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: A Retrospective Analysis

“…In this retrospective study, we analyzed the five-year antimicrobial resistance profiles of P. aeruginosa and Acinetobacter species with an emphasis on the prevalence and trends of carbapenem resistance at the Ethiopian Public Health Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. The prevalence of carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter species in the current study was 61%, which is consistent with the findings of the study from Pretoria, South Africa (63%), 27 and Jimma, Ethiopia (56.4%), 25 however, it is higher than the findings of studies from Lusaka, Zambia (18.2%), 28 Switzerland (9.2%), 29 North-East, Ethiopia (34.5%), 18 Sidama, Ethiopia (9.9%), 22 North Gondar, Ethiopia (20.77%), 24 Northwest Ethiopia (33.3%), 17 and Dessie, Ethiopia (43.8). 16 The variation could be attributed to differences in study design, the number of isolates analyzed, the types of specimens considered, and the amount of data analyzed, as some studies only analyzed fewer data, while others analyzed a large amount of national antimicrobial resistance data, geographical differences, and antibiotic prescription policy differences.…”

“…The prevalence of Acinetobacter species and P. aeruginosa were (N=185/ 7110, 2.6%) and (N=142/7110, 2%), respectively. Twenty-four (24) and fourteen ( 14) Acinetobacter species and P. aeruginosa were excluded since carbapenem was not tested against them. Finally, we analyzed 161 Acinetobacter species and 128 Pseudomonas aeruginosa data Figure 1.…”

Prevalence of meropenem-resistant Pseudomonas Aeruginosa in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta‑analysis

“…Geographically, the studies were distributed across various regions of Ethiopia, with eight conducted in the Amhara region [ 26 – 33 ], three in Oromia [ 34 – 36 ], three in SNNPR [ 37 – 39 ], four in Addis Ababa [ 40 – 43 ], and one in Harari [ 44 ].…”

“…Et al [ 30 ] 0.20910977 0.0773275 0.34089205 Mekonnen et al [ 29 ] 0.14995179 0.09382511 0.20607847 Alebel et al [ 27 ] 0.14969699 0.09391756 0.20547643 Abdeta et al [ 40 ] 0.14658256 0.09069896 0.20246616 Alemayehu. Et al [ 38 ] 0.14505221 0.09029172 0.1998127 Mitiku et al [ 39 ] 0.14585564 0.09048406 0.2012272 Abda et al [ 26 ] 0.15089363 0.09481937 0.20696789 Bizuayehu et al [ 43 ] 0.15028805 0.09435938 0.20621672 Abayneh et al [ 37 ] 0.17417368 0.11178836 0.236559 Worku et al [ 33 ] 0.17417368 0.11178836 0.236559 Tilahun et al [ 32 ] 0.1223927 0.07197122 0.17281418 Beshah et al [ 41 ] 0.1467315 0.09193183 0.20153117 …”

Bacterial Nanocellulose/Copper as a Robust Laccase-Mimicking Bionanozyme for Catalytic Oxidation of Phenolic Pollutants

“…Bacterial DNA extraction and PCR amplification were performed for the nanocellulose-producing bacterium, as described in ref . Briefly, bacterial genomic DNA was extracted using a DNA extraction kit (QIAGEN, QIAamp DNA Mini Kit) according to the manufacturer’s instructions and eluted in 100 μL of TE buffer.…”