KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Turkish Journal of Veterinary Research / 2018 / Cilt: 2 - Sayı: 1

The presence and prevalence of Enterococcus faecalis and Enterococcus faecium strains in urine and stool samples

İsmail Hakkı EKIN
Sevil ATES
Gülşah TOLLU
Ozgul GULAYDIN
Kemal GURTURK
Ziya ILHAN
Cihat OZTURK
Sayfa
14–18
Yayın Tarihi
2018-04-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Conclusion: As a result of the study in Van, Turkey, the isolation rate of Enterococcus faecalis and Enterococcus faecium strains were found to be lower than other regions.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Objective: In this study, it was aimed to investigate the presence and the prevalence of Enterococcus faecalis and Enterococcus faecium strains isolated from the urine and stool samples.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Materials and Methods: A total of 500 routine urine and feces samples were used for testing as the study materials, and a total of 349 Enterococcus spp. were collected for investigation.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Conclusion: As a result of the study in Van, Turkey, the isolation rate of Enterococcus faecalis and Enterococcus faecium strains were found to be lower than other regions.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Stool · Enterococcus faecium · Enterococcus faecalis

Abstract

Objective: In this study, it was aimed to investigate the presence and the prevalence of Enterococcus faecalis and Enterococcus faecium strains isolated from the urine and stool samples. Materials and Methods: A total of 500 routine urine and feces samples were used for testing as the study materials, and a total of 349 Enterococcus spp. were collected for investigation. For the isolation, blood agar and bile esculin agar were used. DNA isolations of the 24-hour growth cultures of possible enterococci were carried out using a DNA isolation kit. Results: Out of 350 routine urine and 150 stool samples taken with the approval of the patients, 235 (67.1%) and 114 (76%) Enterococcus spp. were isolated respectively. Using the multiplex PCR method with species specific primers, 136 (57.8%) of urine and 22 (19.2%) of stool originated enterococcal strains were identified as Enterococcus faecalis; on the other hand, 17 (7.2%) of urine and 61 (53.5%) of stool originated enterococci were identified as Enterococcus faecium. Conclusion: As a result of the study in Van, Turkey, the isolation rate of Enterococcus faecalis and Enterococcus faecium strains were found to be lower than other regions.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

EKIN, İ. H., ATES, S., TOLLU, G., GULAYDIN, O., GURTURK, K., ILHAN, Z., OZTURK, C. (2018). The presence and prevalence of Enterococcus faecalis and Enterococcus faecium strains in urine and stool samples. Turkish Journal of Veterinary Research, Cilt: 2 - Sayı: 1, 14–18. https://ajindex.com/articles/809816

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (15)

  1. Barrie PS, Christou NV, Patchen DE (1990). Patologenicity of the enterococcus in surgical infections. Annals of Surgery, 212, 155-159.
  2. Baylan O, Nazik H, Bektöre B, Çitil BE, Turan D, Öngen B, Özyurt M, Açikel CH, Haznedaroğlu T (2011). Üriner enterokok izolatlarının antibiyotik direnci ile virulens faktörleri arasındaki ilişki. Mikrobiyol Bul, 45, 3, 430-445.
  3. Chenoweth C, Schaberg D (1990). The epidemiology of enterococcus. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis, 9, 80-89.
  4. Devriese L, Baele M, Butaye P (2006). The Genus Enterococcus: Taxonomy. Prokaryotes.4, 163-174.
  5. Eliopoulos GM, Eliopoulos CT (1990). Therapy of Enteococcal Infections. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis, 9, 118-126.
  6. Ergin ÖY, Bayram ED, Uzun B, Güngör S, Demirdal T (2013). İdrar kültürlerinden izole edilen Enterococcus türleri ve antibiyotik dirençleri. ANKEM Derg, 27, 4, 173-178.
  7. Fisher K, Phillips C (2009). The ecology, epidemiology and virulence of Enterococcus. Microbiol, 155, 1749-1757.
  8. Herwaldt LA, Wenzel RP (1995). Dynamics of hospital-acquired infection. Manual of Clinical Microbiology. 6th edition, Washington D.C.: American Society for Microbiology, pp: 169-181.
  9. Hijazi N, Elmanama AA, Al-Hindi A (2009). Vancomycin-resistant enterococci in fecal samples from hospitalized patients and non-hospitalized individuals in Gaza City. J Public Health, 17, 243-249.
  10. Huycke MM, Sahm DF, Gilmore MS (1998). Multiple-drug resistant enterococci: the nature of the problem and an agenda for the future. Emerg Infect Dis, 4, 2,239-249.
  11. Jackson CR, Fedorka-Cray PJ, Barrett JB (2004). Use of a genus- and species-specific multiplex PCR for identification of Enterococci. J Clin Microbiol, 42, 8, 3558-3565.
  12. Kaçmaz B, Akça G, Çağlar K, Sultan N (2003). Enterokoklarda antimikrobiyel duyarlılık. ANKEM Derg, 17, 28-32.
  13. Kariyama R, Mitsuhata R, Chow JW, Clewell DB, Kumon H (2000). Simple and reliable multiplex PCR assay for surveillance isolates of vancomycin-resistant enterococci. J Clin Microbiol, 38, 3092-3095.
  14. Koneman EW, Allen SD, Janda WM (1997). The Gram Positive Cocci Part II Streptococci, Enterococci and The Streptococci Like Bacteria. In Color Atlas and Textbook of Diagnostic Microbiology, 5th Ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott, pp: 577-629.
  15. Koneman EW, Allen SD, Janda WM, Schreckenberger PC, Winn WC. Procop G, Woods G (2005). Color Atlas and Textbook of Diagnostic Microbiology. Sixth edition. Philadelphia: JB Lippincott Co 700-711 pp. Lautenbach E, Bilker W, Brennan P (1999). Enterococcal bacteremia: Risk factors