SENSITIVITY TO ANTIBACTERIAL DRUGS AND PHENOTYPIC DETERMINATION OF RESISTANCE FACTORS IN MICROORGANISMS OF THE ENTEROBACTERIACEAE FAMILY – PATHOGENS OF WOUND INFECTIONS

Potochilova V., Rudneva K., Pokas O., Vishnyakova G.

MICROBIOLOGY

Scentific article

Surgical patients with purulent-inflammatory diseases make up 35-45%, postoperative purulent complications occur in 24-30% of cases. Surgical wound infections account for up to 15% of the total number of nosocomial infections. Mortality in surgical purulent infection is from 40 to 75%. We studied 103 strains of UPM isolated from wounds in patients undergoing treatment in the surgical department of the KNP KOR Kyiv Regional Clinical Hospital. Among this group of microorganisms were representatives of the Enterobacteriaceae – 34.9% family. Non-fermenting gramnegative bacteria accounted for 15.5% of all selected strains. The leading causative agents of wound infections in patients in the surgical department of the KNP KOR Kyiv Regional Clinical Hospital are representatives of the Enterobacteriaceae family – 34.9%. The most common pathogen was E. coli (16.5%). The most active antibiotic for enterobacteria was netilmicin. With cephalosporin antibiotics, the most active cefotaxime is 47.2±8.3%. It was found that 52.8±8.3% of strains of enterobacteria isolated from wounds in surgical patients were betalactamase producers, 25.0±7.2% showed combined phenotypes. Cephalosporinases were isolated from beta-lactamases: ESβL – 44.4±8.3% of strains, and AmpC – 11.1±5.2% of producer strains. 25.0±7.2% of the strains were producers of Klebsiella pneumonia carbapenemases (KPC). Beta-lactamase producers were K. pneumoniae strains (75%). ESβL producers showed resistance to cephalosporin antibiotics, fluoroquinolones, however, they remained sensitive to netilmicin (75.0±15.3%) and meropenem (50±17.1%). The carbapenemase producing strains were resistant to ampicillin, amikacin, fluoroquinolones, ceftazidime, carbapenem. Resistance to all antibiotic groups was detected in the strain that was the carrier of the combined phenotype ESβL + AmpC + KRS.

resistance, phenotype, microorganism, Enterobacteriaceae family, resistance factor.

1. Surgical Site Infection (SSI) Event. Procedure-associated Module. European Center for Disease Control. 2016 Jan.
2. Mariievskyi VF, Salmanov AG, Doan SI. Analiz etiolohichnoi struktury zbudnykiv hniino-zapalnykh infektsii u khirurhichnykh statsionarakh Ukrainy v 2008 r. Ukrainskii zhurnal klinichnoi ta laboratornoi medytsyny. 2010;1(5):162-9. [in Ukrainian].
3. Calne S, editor. Identifying criteria for wound infection. Medical Education Partnership LTD; 2005. 17 p.
4. Gordinskaya NA, Sabirova EV, Abramova NV. Osobennosti vozbuditelei ranevoi infektsii u patsientov s termicheskoi travmoi. Meditsinskii almanakh. 2012;5(24):181-3. [in Russiаn].
5. Wound Management. Best practice guidelines in disaster situations. World Health Organisation. WHO/EHT/CPR; 2005.
6. Slyotov AM, Sivakon SV. Osobennosti vozbuditelei ranevoi infektsii v travmatologicheskom statsionare. Vestnik Penzenskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. 2013;2:65-9. [in Russiаn].
7. Dyachenko SV, Bobrovnikova MY, Slobodenyuk YeV. Bakteriologicheskii monitoring ranevykh infektsii v mnogoprofilnom khirurgicheskom statsionare. Тikhookeanskii meditsinskii zhurnal. 2015;1:80-2. [in Russiаn].
8. Potochylova VV, Babak SI. Uskladneni infektsii oblasti khirurhichnoho vtruchannia ta porivnialna kharakterystyka chutlyvosti mikroorganizmiv do antybiotykiv rezervu u viddilenniakh khirurhichnoho profiliu. Scientific Journal «Science Rise». 2015;8(3):47-52. [in Ukrainian].
9. Nakaz № 167 vid 5.04.2007 Pro zatverdzhennia metodychnykh vkazivok «Vyznachennia chutlyvosti mikroohanizmiv do antubakterialnykh preparativ». Кyiv: 2007. 79 s. [in Ukrainian].
10. Grigorievskaya ZV, Petukhova IN, Dmitrieva NV. Vspyshka vnutribolnichnoi infektsii, vyzvannoi multirezistentnymi (MDR) shtammami K. Pneumoniae. Sibirskiy onkologicheskiy zhurnal. 2014;2(62):5-8. [in Russiаn].
11. Doi Y, Paterson DL. Carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae. Semin Respir Crit Care Med. 2015;36(1):74-84.
12. Osipov VA, Tapalskiy DV, Skleenova YeYu, Eydelshteyn MV. Metallo-beta-laktamazy gramotritsatelnykh bakteriy: rastushchaya problema v mire i v Belarusi. Meditsinskie novosti. 2013;2:84-8. [in Russiаn].
13. Black JA, Moland ES, Thomson KS. AmpC Disk Test for Detection of Plasmid-Mediated AmpC β-Lactamases in Enterobacteriaceae Lacking Chromosomal AmpC β-Lactamases. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2005;43(7):3110-3.
14. CLSI. Methods for Dilution Antimicrobial Susceptibility Tests for Bacteria That Grow Aerobically; Approved Standard – Tenth Edition. CLSI document M07-A10. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2015.
15. EUCAST guidelines for detection of resistance mechanisms and specific resistances of clinical and/or epidemiological importance, Version 1.0, December 2013. Available from: http://www.eucast.org
16. Black JA, Moland ES, Thomson KS. AmpC Disk Test for Detection of Plasmid-Mediated AmpC β-Lactamases in Enterobacteriaceae Lacking Chromosomal AmpC β-Lactamases. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2005;43(7):3110-3.
17. Pournaras S, Poulou A, Tsakris A. Inhibitor-based methods for the detection of KPC carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae in clinical practice by using boronic acid compounds. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2010;65(7):1319-21.

«Bulletin of problems biology and medicine» Issue 3 (157), 2020 year, 208-213 pages, index UDK 579.61+616-008.87/-001.4+616.036.8/615.281.9

10.29254/2077-4214-2020-3-157-208-213