Antibiotics Susceptibility Pattern in Diabetic Ulcer Patients
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24293/ijcpml.v27i2.1652Keywords:
Diabetic ulcer, bacterial pattern, antibiotic susceptibilityAbstract
Diabetic ulcers are a chronic complication of diabetes mellitus and have a high risk of infection. Severe ulcer infections are a significant cause of lower-extremity amputations in addition to trauma. Therefore, therapy for diabetic ulcer infections must be performed immediately. This study aimed to determine the bacterial susceptibility pattern to the antibiotic in diabetic ulcer patients. This study was retrospective observational descriptive by taking the results of swab culture and antibiotic susceptibility patterns data in diabetic ulcer patients at Ulin General Hospital, Banjarmasin, in 2016-2018. The results showed 41 (62.1%) monomicrobial infections and 25 (37.9%) polymicrobial infections. The number of Gram-negative bacilli (57.4%) was higher than Gram-positive cocci (42.6%). The most common bacterial isolates on pus culture were Staphylococcus aureus (26.6%), Klebsiella pneumonia (19.1%), and Escherichia coli (12.8%). Antibiotic susceptibility test results showed that Gram-positive bacteria were sensitive to Tigecycline (100%), Nitrofurantoin (96.9%), and Linezolid (96.8%). Gram-negative bacteria were susceptible to Ertapenem (92.7%), Meropenem, and Amikacin (90.6%). S.aureus isolates were sensitive 100% to Meropenem and Tigecycline. K.peneumoniae and E.coli isolates were susceptible 100% to Meropenem and Amikacin. It was concluded in this study that the prevalence of Gram-negative bacteria in diabetic ulcer infection was higher than Gram-positive bacteria. The most common isolated Gram-negative bacteria were K.pneumoniae and E.coli, while the most common Gram-positive bacteria were S.aureus. The most sensitive antibiotics for K.pneumoniae and E.coli were Meropenem and Amikacin, while the most sensitive antibiotics for S.aureus were Linezolid and Tigecycline.
Downloads
References
Karuranga S, Fernandes JR, Huang Y, Malanda B. IDF th diabetes atlas. 8 Ed., United States, International Diabetes Federation, 2017; 130.
World Health Organization. Global report on diabetes. Prancis, World Health Organization. 2016. Available f r o m U R L : h t t p s : / / w w w . w h o . i n t / d i a b e t e s /global-report/en/ (accessed 9 December, 2018).
Kementerian Kesehatan RI. Hasil utama Riskesdas 2 0 1 8 . A v a i l a b l e f r o m U R L : h t t p : / / w w w . depkes.go.id/resources/download/info-terkini/hasil-riskesdas-2018.pdf (accessed 9 December,
.
Kementerian Kesehatan RI. Situasi dan analisis diabetes. 2014. Available from URL:http://www.
depkes.go.id/resours//download/pusdatin/infodatin/infodatin-diabetes.pdf (accessed 9 December, 2018).
Sari YO, Almasdy D, Fatimah A. Evaluasi penggunaan antibiotik pada pasien ulkus diabetikum di Instalasi Rawat Inap (IRNA) penyakit dalam RSUP Dr. M. Djamil Padang. Jurnal Sains Farmasi & Klinis, 2018; 5(2): 102-11.
Ibrahim AM. Diabetic foot ulcer: Synopsis of the epidemiology and pathophysiology. International
Journal of Diabetes and Endocrinology, 2018; 3(2): 23-8.
Nurhanifah D. Faktor-faktor yang berhubungan dengan ulkus kaki diabetik di poliklinik kaki diabetik.
Healthy-Mu Journal, 2017; 1(1):32-41.
Perim MC, Borges JC, Celeste RSC, Orsolin EF, Mendes RR, et al. Aerobic bacterial profile and antibiotic
resistance in patients with diabetic foot infections Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical,
; 48(5): 546-54.
Smith K, Collier A, Townsend EM, O'Donnell LE, Bal Am, et al. One step closer to understanding the role of bacteria in diabetic foot ulcers: Characterising the microbiome of ulcers. BMC Microbiology, 2016; 16(54): 1-12.
Riddle MC. Standards of medical care in diabetes-2019. Diabetes Care, 2019; 42(1): S1-S193.
Patil P, Khadse R, Chavan S, Raut S. Bacteriological profile of diabetic foot infections. European Journal of Pharmaceutical and Medical Research, 2018; 5(6): 631-5.
Jain SK, Barman R. Bacteriological profile of diabetic foot ulcer with special reference to drug-resistant strains in a tertiary care center in North-East India. Indian Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism, 2017; 21(5): 688-94.
Yi KR, Leng LC, Kumar RJ, Zakaria ZAM, Khan ES. Microbiology of diabetic foot infection in three district hospitals in Malaysia and comparison with southeast Asian countries. Med J Malaysia, 2019; 74(5): 394-9.
Nur A, Nelly M. Gambaran bakteri ulkus diabetikum di Rumah Sakit Zainal Abidin dan Meuraxa tahun 2015. Buletin Penelitian Kesehatan, 2016; 44(3): 187–96.
Saraswathy KM, Pramodhini S, Babu CPG, Umadevi S, Seetha KS. Bacteriological profile and their antibiotic susceptibility pattern in diabetic foot ulcer in a tertiary care hospital, Puducherry, India. Int.J.Curr.Microbiol. App.Sci, 2017; 6(3): 1560-6.
Spichler A, Hurwitz BL, Armstrong DG, Lipsky BA. Microbiology of diabetic foot infections: From Louis
Pasteur to 'crime scene investigation'. BioMed Central Medicine, 2015; 13(2): 1-13.
Brooks GF, Carrol KC, Butel JS, Morse SA, Mietzner TA. Jawetz, Melnick & Adelbergs medical microbiology. th 28 Ed., United States, McGraw-Hill, 2019; 202-3.
Noor AP, Puntodewo. Microbiology and antibiotic sensitivity pattern of diabetic foot ulcer patients.
American Scientific Research Journal, 2019; 54(1): 49-55.
Katzung BG. Basic & clinical pharmacology. 14 Ed., New York, McGraw-Hill, 2018; 833-34.
Downloads
Submitted
Accepted
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 INDONESIAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PATHOLOGY AND MEDICAL LABORATORY
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
