Pseudomonas aeruginosa: an emerging nosocomial trouble in veterinary

Abstract

Objective. The goal of this study was to evaluate the susceptibility pattern of isolates P. aeruginosa from veterinary clinical centers in Bogotá, D.C., to some commonly used antibiotics in clinical. Materials and methods. Bacteriological standard protocols were used for the isolation and identification of bacterial strains. To evaluate the antimicrobial susceptibility of the isolates, to commonly used antibiotics, was performed the Kirby-Bauer agar-disk diffusion method on Mueller-Hinton agar. Results. A total of 160 samples was taken from clinical specimens and the environment in different veterinary clinics. Out of these samples, 89 (55.6%) were gram-negative strains, of which ten strains of P. aeruginosa were isolated (11.2%). All strains were resistant to Cefazolin, Lincomycin, Cephalothin, Ampicillin, Clindamycin, Sulfamethoxazole-Trimethoprim and Chloramphenicol while some isolates exhibited either resistance or an intermediate response to Amikacin (30%), Gentamicin (30%), Tobramycin (10%), Ciprofloxacin (20%), Ceftazidime (30%), Erythromycin (100%), Tetracycline (100%), Imipenem (10%), Meropenem (90%) and Bacitracin (90%). Conclusions. The results demonstrate that the acquired antimicrobial resistances of P. aeruginosa strains depend on antibiotic protocols applied. As observed in human hospitals, Pseudomonas aeruginosa is acting as one of the multidrug-resistant microorganisms of veterinary clinical relevance.

Aislamiento e identificación de bacterias con potencial nosocomial procedentes de ambientes y superficies de una clínica veterinaria Universitaria del Área Metropolitana del Valle de Aburrá, Antioquia-Colombia

“…En el presente trabajo, se encontró que las cepas de P. aeruginosa aisladas son resistentes a múltiples fármacos, lo que sugiere que la presión selectiva creada por el uso persistente y posiblemente inadecuado de estos antimicrobianos en la práctica clínica veterinaria, sea uno de los factores determinantes para la aparición de dicha resistencia 23 . Para Colombia, se tiene un reporte de resistencia en Pseudomonas aeruginosa para una clínica veterinaria en Bogotá, donde se obtuvieron 10 aislados provenientes del ambiente y muestras clínicas, con resultados que demostraron multiresistencia para algunos de los 18 antibióticos empleados en los antibiogramas 14 . Las infecciones asociadas a hospitales con este patógeno se relacionan principalmente con pacientes inmunocomprometidos.…”

Pseudomonas aeruginosa DnaK Stimulates the Production of Pentraxin 3 via TLR4-Dependent NF-κB and ERK Signaling Pathways

“…Innate immune responses play essential roles in defending against microbial infections in animals (e.g., infections by avian influenza, swine influenza, Aspergillus , pathogenic Escherichia coli ( E. coli ), Shigella , and Pseudomonas aeruginosa ( P. aeruginosa )) [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 ]. As critical players in innate immune responses, macrophages represent the first lines of host defense, which is modulated by the action of diverse pattern recognition molecules (PRMs).…”

Environmental Recovery of Nosocomial Bacteria in a Companion Animal Shelter Before and After Infection Control Procedures

“…Studies sampling small animal veterinary clinic environments have reported the bacterial recovery of Escherichia coli ranging from 76 to 89.5% ( 1 , 10 ), MRSA from 1.4–16% ( 7 , 9 ), MRSP from 2 to 13.8% ( 6 , 11 ) and P . aeruginosa isolated from 30% (3/10) of the sampled environments ( 4 ). In large animal veterinary hospitals, disinfectants have been shown to reduce environmental bacteria ( 12 , 13 ); however, there is no literature regarding the efficacy of cleaning and disinfection protocols in small animal veterinary clinics and animal shelters.…”

“…Nosocomial infections are a growing concern in both human and veterinary medicine. Commonly isolated bacteria causing nosocomial infections in dogs and cats include: methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), methicillin resistant S. pseudintermedius (MRSP), Pseudomonas aeruginosa and multidrug resistant (MDR) Enterobacteriaceae (1)(2)(3)(4). These potential pathogens present in the environment of veterinary clinics may be transmitted to animals via direct contact, veterinary personnel, other animals, and may cause infections such as surgical site, urinary tract, and bloodstream infections (5).…”

“…Potential nosocomial bacterial pathogens have been isolated from surfaces that animals and humans frequently come in contact with in veterinary clinics, including: animal cages, water bowls, floors, water taps, door handles, treatment, and surgical benches (1,(6)(7)(8)(9). Studies sampling small animal veterinary clinic environments have reported the bacterial recovery of Escherichia coli ranging from 76 to 89.5% (1,10), MRSA from 1.4-16% (7,9), MRSP from 2 to 13.8% (6,11) and P. aeruginosa isolated from 30% (3/10) of the sampled environments (4). In large animal veterinary hospitals, disinfectants have been shown to reduce environmental bacteria (12,13); however, there is no literature regarding the efficacy of cleaning and disinfection protocols in small animal veterinary clinics and animal shelters.…”