COMPARISON OF BIOFILM DETECTION METHODS IN THE FAMILY ENTEROBACTERICEAE

Arul. M, Dr. S. S. M. Umamageswari, Oviya Priya. I

Abstract


Biofilms are one of the important causes of wound infection and therefore their management requires an understanding of mechanism of biofilm production by bacteria. By definition, biofilms are matrix-enclosed aggregates of bacteria that are immobilized on surfaces or at interfaces in the ecosystems in which they are known to predominate .Tissue Culture Plate (TCP) method and Modified Tissue Culture Plate (MTCP) method were studied.

AIM:

 1) To detect biofilm production in pus isolates by TCP method and MTCP method;

2) To compare Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (AST) of biofilm producing and non biofilm producing isolates.

METHODOLOGY AND MATERIALS:

The organisms was identified using standard microbiological procedures and AST was done by Kirby-Bauer disc diffusion method with  the CLSI guidelines 2019.

Biofilm production was detected using TCP and MTCP methods.

RESULT:

     A total of 180 isolates were obtained out of 240 pus samples. Bacteriological profile includes Klebsiella spp. (n=46), Escherichia coli (n=52), Citrobacter spp. (n=30), Proteus spp. (n=40), Enterobacter spp. (n=12). Out of these, 58.8% isolates showed biofilm production by TCP and 70% by MTCP method. The rate of biofilm detection by two methods was found to be statistically significant (p-value =0.004).

 In our study, biofilm production as per standard TCP method were more prevalent in Klebsiella spp. (35%) followed by Proteus spp. (20%), Enterobacter spp. (5%), E. coli (30%) and Citrobacter spp. (16%). The magnitude of biofilm production by individual bacterial spp. The magnitude of biofilm production by individual bacterial spp is depicted .

CONCLUSION:

 MTCP method was found to be more accurate  than TCP for biofilm detection and quantification.

 


Full Text:

PDF

References


Singhal H, Kaur K. Wound infection clinical presentation. Medscape Medical News from Web MD. 2015

Sharma M, Yadav A. Biofilms: microbes and disease. Braz J Infect Dis. 2008;12(6):526-30.

Wolcott R, Costerton JW, Raoult D, Cutler SJ. The polymicrobial nature of biofilm infection. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2013;19(2):107-12.

Christensen GD, Simpson WA, Younger JA, Baddour LM, Barret FF, Melton DM, et al. Adherence of coagulase negative Staphylococci to plastic tissue cultures: a quantitative model for the adherence of Staphylococci to medical devices. J Clin Microbiol. 1985;22(6):996-1006.

Brook I, Frazier EH. Aerobic and anaerobic bacteriology of wounds and cutaneous abscesses. Arch Surg. 1990;125(11):1445-51.

Bose S, Ghosh AK. Biofilms: a challenge to medical science. J Clin Diag Res. 2011;5(1):127-30

Colle JG, Miles RB, Watt B. Tests for identification of bacteria. In: Colle JG, Fraser AG, Marmon BP, Simmons A, editors. Mackie and McCartney Practical Medical Microbiology: Churchill Livingstone. 1996:131-49.

Duguid JP. Staining Methods. In: Collee JG, Fraser AG, Marmon BP, Simmons A, editors. Mackie and McCartney Practical Medical Microbiology. Churchill Livingstone. 1996:793-812

CLSI. Performance standards for antimicrobial disc susceptibility testing. 26th

ed. CLSI supplement M100-S. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards

Institute; 2016.

Hassan A, Usman J, Kaleem F, Omair M, Khalid A, Iqbal M. Evaluation of different detection methods of biofilm formation in the clinical isolates. Braz J Infect Dis 2011;15:305-11.

J.G Fraser AG, Marmon BP, Simmons A, editors. Mackie and McCartney

Practical Medical Microbiology. New York: Churchill Livingstone. 1996: 95-111.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.