SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Van Tıp Dergisi / 2005 / Cilt: 12 - Sayı: 2

Proteus vulgaris species isolated from various clinical specimens and their antimicrobial susceptibilities

Klinik örneklerden izole edilen Proteus vulgaris suşlarının antimikrobiyal ajanlara duyarlılıkları

Hamza BOZKURT
HÜSEYİN GÜDÜCÜOĞLU
M. Güzel KURTOĞLU
Hanefi KÖRKOCA
İ. Hakkı ÇİFTÇİ
Kumru AYGÜL
Mustafa BERKTAŞ
Pages
145–148
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

As we determined; the most effective antimicrobials against P. vulgaris were amikacin (92%), çiprofloxacin(92%), imipenem (92%), gentamicin (90%), tobramicin (90%) and norfloscacin (85%); the resistance rates of iiitrafuraiitoin, sefaioline, ampicilline, sefuroxime were 95%, 93% ,89%, 86%, respectively.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In our study we aimed to investigate the antimicrobial susceptibilities of Proteus vulgaris strains isolated from various clinics in Van Region.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Sceptor Gram negative ID Panels were used to make identification and antimicrobial susceptibility tests. 78 P. vulgaris strains were isolated, 68 öf them were from urine, 4 oftlnem were from external ear canal, 2 of them were from wound, 2 of them were from sputum, 1 of them was from umbilical sample.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As we determined; the most effective antimicrobials against P. vulgaris were amikacin (92%), çiprofloxacin(92%), imipenem (92%), gentamicin (90%), tobramicin (90%) and norfloscacin (85%); the resistance rates of iiitrafuraiitoin, sefaioline, ampicilline, sefuroxime were 95%, 93% ,89%, 86%, respectively.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Proteus vulgaris · Kültür ortamı · Mikrobiyal duyarlılık testleri

Abstract

In our study we aimed to investigate the antimicrobial susceptibilities of Proteus vulgaris strains isolated from various clinics in Van Region. In, order to isolate the strains, we used conventional culture methods. Sceptor Gram negative ID Panels were used to make identification and antimicrobial susceptibility tests. 78 P. vulgaris strains were isolated, 68 öf them were from urine, 4 oftlnem were from external ear canal, 2 of them were from wound, 2 of them were from sputum, 1 of them was from umbilical sample. As we determined; the most effective antimicrobials against P. vulgaris were amikacin (92%), çiprofloxacin(92%), imipenem (92%), gentamicin (90%), tobramicin (90%) and norfloscacin (85%); the resistance rates of iiitrafuraiitoin, sefaioline, ampicilline, sefuroxime were 95%, 93% ,89%, 86%, respectively.

Özet

Bizim çalışmamızla Van bölgesinde çeşitli klinik örneklerden izole, edilen Proteus vulgaris suşlannın antimikrobiyal ajanlara duyarlılıklarının ortaya konulması amaçlanmıştır. Suşların izolasyonunda klasik kültür yöntemleri uygulanmış, identifikasyon ve antimikrobiyal alanlara duyarlılığın ortaya konulmasında ise. Sceptor Gram negatif ID paneller (Bectön Dickinson-USA) kullanılmıştır. Çalışmada klinik örneklerden izole edilen toplam 78 P. vulgaris suşunun 68'i idrar, 4'ü kulak,, 2'si yara, 2'si balgam, l'i ampiyem ve l'i umblikal örnekten izole edilmiştir. Bu suşlara karşı en etkili antimikrobiyal ajanların amikasin (%92), siprofloksasin (%92), imipenem (%92), gentamisin (%90), tobramisin (%90) ve norfloksasin (%85) olduğu belirlenmiş; nitrofrantoine %95, sefazoline o/o93, ampisiline %89 ve sefuroksime ise %86 oranlarında direnç geliştiği tespit edilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

BOZKURT, H., GÜDÜCÜOĞLU, H., KURTOĞLU, M. G., KÖRKOCA, H., ÇİFTÇİ, İ. H., AYGÜL, K., BERKTAŞ, M. (2005). Proteus vulgaris species isolated from various clinical specimens and their antimicrobial susceptibilities. Van Tıp Dergisi, Cilt: 12 - Sayı: 2, 145–148. https://ajindex.com/articles/334245

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Bilgehan H: Klinik Mikrobiyoloji, Özel Bakteriyoloji ve Bakteri Enfeksiyonları, 9. Baskı, s. 70-75, Fakülteler Kitabevi, İzmir, 1996
  2. Koneman E W, Allen SD, Janda WM, Schreckenberger PC, Winn WC Jr: Color Atlas and Textbook of Diagnostic Microbiology, 5th Ed, Chapter 4, p: 171-252, Lippincott, Philadelphia, 1997
  3. McLean, R.J.C. Nickel JC, Cheng K.J, Costerton J. W: The ecology and pathogenicity of urease producing bacteria in the urinary tract. CRC Crit Rev Microbiol 16:37-39, 1988
  4. Lewis J, Fekety F.R.: Proteus bacteremia. John Hopkins Med J 124:151-156, 1969
  5. Sanders CC, Sanders WE: Beta-lactam resistance in Gram negative bacteria: global trends and clinical impact, Clin Infect Dis 15: 824, 1992
  6. KoláM, Urbánek K, Látal T: Antibiotic selective pressure and development of bacterial resistance, Int J Antimicrobial Agents 17:357-363, 2001
  7. Nayir A: Circumcision for the prevention of significant bacteriuria in boys. Pediatr Nephrol 16: 1129-1134, 2001
  8. Jarlier V, Fosse T, Philippon A, the ICU Study Group: Antibiotic susceptibility in aerobic gram negative bacilli isolated in intensive care units in 39 French teaching hospitals (ICU study). Intens Care Med 22:1057-65, 1996
  9. Verbist L, for the International Study Group: Epidemiology and sensitivity of 8625 ICU and hematology/oncology bacterial isolates inEurope, Scand J Infect Dis 91 (Suppl):14-24, 1993
  10. Na’was TE, Mawajdeh S, Dababneh A, al-Omari A: In vitro activities of antimicrobial agents against Proteus species from clinical specimens. Br J Biomes Sci 51: 95-9, 1994
  11. Erdemoğlu A, Özcan Ş, Diler M, Kurukuyu T, Sezer O: Üriner Sistem İnfeksiyonu Etkeni Gram Negatif Çomaklar ve Çeşitli Antibiyotiklere Duyarlılıkları
  12. Antibiyotik ve Kemoterapi (ANKEM) Kongresi. 5-10 Haziran 2000, Kemer, Antalya, Program ve Poster Özetleri, ANKEM Derg 14: 38, 2000
  13. Erdemoğlu A, Diler M, Özcan Ş, Kurukuyu T, Sezer O: İdrardan izole Edilen Gram Negatif Çomak Suşlarının Levofloksasin, Siprofloksasin ve Ofloksasine Duyarlılıkları
  14. Antibiyotik ve Kemoterapi (ANKEM) Kongresi. 5-10 Haziran 2000, Kemer, Antalya, Program ve Poster Özetleri, ANKEM Derg 14: 39, 2000
  15. Kaygusuz S, Apan TZ, Kılıç D: Toplum kökenli Üriner Sistem İnfeksiyonu Etkeni Gram Negaif Bakterilerde Çeşitli Antibiyotiklere Direnç, ANKEM Derg 15: 753-759, 2001
  16. Efe İris N, Dinç E, Şimşek F,Kepekçi P, YıldırmakT: Toplum Kökenli Üriner Sistem İnfeksiyonu etkeni Gram Negatif Bakterilerin Çeşitli Antibiyotiklere Diren