A Study to Develop Empiric Antibacterial Therapy for Diabetic Foot Ulcers in Rural India
Authors/Creators
- 1. Assistant Professor, Department of General Surgery, SCB Medical College Hospital Cuttack, Odisha, India
- 2. Junior Resident 2, Department of General Surgery, SCB Medical College Hospital Cuttack, Odisha, India
- 3. Assistant Professor, Department of Pathology, MKCG Medical College Hospital Berhampur, Odisha, India
Description
Introduction: In order to evaluate the clinical features, range of microbial flora, antibiotic susceptibility, and develop an empiric antimicrobial therapy, this study was conducted on patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFU). Method: Between December 2020 and November 2021, clinical information and tissue samples were gathered from 100 diabetic foot ulcer patients. Clinical and microbiological data was evaluated after the samples were handled in accordance with Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute recommendations. Results: Males in their fourth and fifth decades of life had the highest prevalence of DFU in this sample of 100 patients. The majority of patients experienced neuropathy and poor glycemic control. Gram-negative bacteria made up 73.6% of the 105 bacterial isolates isolated from 96 samples, while Gram-positive bacteria made up 27.2%. The majority of samples (48.5%) revealed the growth of a single bacterium, followed by the growth of two bacteria and polymicrobial growth in 28.5% and 15.1%, respectively, of tissue samples. The most common isolation (27.2%) was Pseudomonas, which is responsive to imipenem (91%), amikacin (86.5%), gentamicin (83.2%), and cefotaxime (81%). Staphylococcus aureus (19.0%) is the next most common isolate, and it is sensitive to amikacin and gentamicin (99%), as well as ofloxacin (91%). Ampicillin, amoxicillin-clavulanic acid, Proteus, and Klebsiella were all very resistant to these medications. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that DFU are typical in the fourth and fifth decades of life. Most infectious organisms are gram-negative bacteria. The majority of bacteria, both Gram positive and Gram negative, are sensitive to aminoglycosides and have varying degrees of resistance to routinely used antibiotics. DFU infections can be treated with amikacin and gentamicin as empiric antibiotics.
Abstract (English)
Introduction: In order to evaluate the clinical features, range of microbial flora, antibiotic susceptibility, and develop an empiric antimicrobial therapy, this study was conducted on patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFU). Method: Between December 2020 and November 2021, clinical information and tissue samples were gathered from 100 diabetic foot ulcer patients. Clinical and microbiological data was evaluated after the samples were handled in accordance with Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute recommendations. Results: Males in their fourth and fifth decades of life had the highest prevalence of DFU in this sample of 100 patients. The majority of patients experienced neuropathy and poor glycemic control. Gram-negative bacteria made up 73.6% of the 105 bacterial isolates isolated from 96 samples, while Gram-positive bacteria made up 27.2%. The majority of samples (48.5%) revealed the growth of a single bacterium, followed by the growth of two bacteria and polymicrobial growth in 28.5% and 15.1%, respectively, of tissue samples. The most common isolation (27.2%) was Pseudomonas, which is responsive to imipenem (91%), amikacin (86.5%), gentamicin (83.2%), and cefotaxime (81%). Staphylococcus aureus (19.0%) is the next most common isolate, and it is sensitive to amikacin and gentamicin (99%), as well as ofloxacin (91%). Ampicillin, amoxicillin-clavulanic acid, Proteus, and Klebsiella were all very resistant to these medications. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that DFU are typical in the fourth and fifth decades of life. Most infectious organisms are gram-negative bacteria. The majority of bacteria, both Gram positive and Gram negative, are sensitive to aminoglycosides and have varying degrees of resistance to routinely used antibiotics. DFU infections can be treated with amikacin and gentamicin as empiric antibiotics.
Files
IJPCR,Vol15,Issue1,Article6.pdf
Files
(374.6 kB)
| Name | Size | Download all |
|---|---|---|
|
md5:1e1cc2ffae9761ed29d36a1cb629a2c5
|
374.6 kB | Preview Download |
Additional details
Dates
- Accepted
-
2023-01-05
Software
- Repository URL
- https://impactfactor.org/PDF/IJPCR/15/IJPCR,Vol15,Issue1,Article6.pdf
- Development Status
- Active
References
- 1. Joshi SR, Parikh RM. India; the diabetes capital of the world: Now heading towards hypertension. JournalAssociation of Physicians of India. 2007 May 1;55(Y):323. 2. Anjana RM, Pradeepa R, Deepa M, Datta M, Sudha V, Unnikrishnan R, Bhansali A, Joshi SR, Joshi PP, Yajnik CS, Dhandhania VK. Prevalence of diabetes and prediabetes (impaired fasting glucose and/or impaired glucose tolerance) in urban and rural India: Phase I results of the Indian Council of Medical Research–India DIABetes (ICMR–INDIAB) study. Diabetologia. 2011 Dec; 54(12):3022- 7. 3. Singh AK, Yeola M, Singh N, Damke S. A study on diabetic foot ulcers in Central rural India to formulate empiric antimicrobial therapy. Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care. 2020 Aug;9(8):4216. 4. Yerat RC, Rangasamy VR. A clinicomicrobial study of diabetic foot ulcer infections in South India. International Journal of Medicine and Public Health. 2015;5(3). 5. Chen J, Min R, Wang H, Zhao S, Li H, Fang P. Trends and drivers of inpatient antibiotic consumption among 89 China tertiary general hospitals from 2011Q1 to 2015Q4. BioMed research international. 2018 Nov 1;2018. 6. Keane WF, Brenner BM, De Zeeuw D, Grunfeld JP, McGill J, Mitch WE, Ribeiro AB, Shahinfar S, Simpson RL,Snapinn SM, Toto R. The risk of developing end-stage renal disease in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy: the RENAAL study. Kidney international. 2003 Apr 1;63 (4):1499-507. 7. Bakker K, Apelqvist J, Lipsky BA, Van Netten JJ, Schaper NC, International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF). The 2015 IWGDF guidance documents on prevention and management of foot problems in diabetes: development of an evidence-based global consensus. Diabetes/metabolism research and reviews. 2016 Jan; 32:2-6. 8. Wagner Jr FW. The dysvascular foot: a system for diagnosis and treatment. Foot & ankle. 1981 Sep;2(2):64-122. 9. Boulton AJ, Armstrong DG, Albert SF, Frykberg RG, Hellman R, Kirkman MS, Lavery LA, LeMaster JW, Mills Sr JL, Mueller MJ, Sheehan P. Comprehensive foot examination and risk assessment: a report of the task force of the foot care interest group of the American Diabetes Association, with endorsement by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists. Diabetes care. 2008 Aug 1;31(8) :1679-85. 10. Senneville É, Lipsky BA, Abbas ZG, Aragón-Sánchez J, Diggle M, Embil JM, Kono S, Lavery LA, Malone M, van Asten SA, Urbančič-Rovan V. Diagnosis of infection in the foot in diabetes: a systematic review. Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews. 2020 Mar;36:e3281. 11. Abdulrazak A, Bitar ZI, Al-Shamali AA, Mobasher LA. Bacteriological study of diabetic foot infections. Journal of Diabetes and its Complications. 2005 May 1;19(3):138- 41. 12. Grigoropoulou P, Eleftheriadou I, Jude EB, Tentolouris N. Diabetic foot infections: an update in diagnosis and management. Current diabetes reports. 2017 Jan;17(1):1-2. 13. Shahi SK, Kumar A, Kumar S, Singh SK, Gupta SK, Singh TB. Prevalence of diabetic foot ulcer and associated risk factors in diabetic patients from North India. The journal of diabetic foot complications. 2012;4(3):83-91. 14. Al-Maskari F, El-Sadig M. Prevalence of risk factors for diabetic foot complications. BMC family practice. 2007 Dec;8(1):1-9. 15. Gadepalli R, Dhawan B, Sreenivas V, Kapil A, Ammini AC, Chaudhry R. A clinico-microbiological study of diabetic foot ulcers in an Indian tertiary care hospital. Diabetes care. 2006 Aug 1;29(8):1727-32. 16. Deribe B, Woldemichael K, Nemera G. Prevalence and factors influencing diabetic foot ulcer among diabetic patients attending Arbaminch Hospital, South Ethiopia. J Diabetes Metab. 2014;5(1):1-7. 17. Mamo T, Yifter H, Lemessa T. Risk factors assessment of diabetic foot ulcer using the sixty seconds screening tool: a hospital based cross-sectional study at Tikur Anbessa specialized Hospital. Ethiop Med J. 2015 Jul 1;2: 45-9. 18. Kaur N, Kaur N, Kumar R, Gill AK. Clinical and susceptibility profile from diabetic foot patients in tertiary care hospital. Scholars J Appl Med Sci. 20 14;2(2D):865-9. 19. Alva KA, Aithala PS, Rai R, Rekha B. Clinical and microbiological profile of diabetic foot in patients admitted at a tertiary care center in Mangalore. Muller Journal of Medical Sciences and Research. 2013 Jan 1;4(1):3. 20. Boyko EJ, Ahroni JH, Stensel VI, Forsberg RC, Davignon DR, Smith DG. A prospective study of risk factors for diabetic foot ulcer. The Seattle Diabetic Foot Study. Diabetes care. 1999 Jul 1;22(7):1036-42. 21. Jiang Y, Ran X, Jia L, Yang C, Wang P, Ma J, Chen B, Yu Y, Feng B, Chen L, Yin H. Epidemiology of type 2 diabetic foot problems and predictivefactors for amputation in China. The international journal of lower extremity wounds. 2015 Mar;14(1):19-27. 22. Boulton AJ, Armstrong DG, Kirsner RS, Attinger CE, Lavery LA, Lipsky BA, Mills JL, Steinberg JS. Diagnosis and management of diabetic foot complications. Compendia. 2018 Oct 1;2018(2). 23. Mendes JJ, Marques-Costa A, Vilela C, Neves J, Candeias N, Cavaco-Silva P, Melo-Cristino J. Clinical and bacteriological survey of diabetic foot infections in Lisbon. Diabetes research and clinical practice. 2012 Jan 1;95(1) :153-61. 24. Seth A, Attri AK, Kataria H, Kochhar S, Seth SA, Gautam N. Clinical profile and outcome in patients of diabetic foot infection. International Journal of Applied and Basic Medical Research. 2019 Jan;9(1):14. 25. Turhan V, Mutluoglu M, Acar A, Hatipoglu M, Onem Y, Uzun G, Ay H, Oncul O, Gorenek L. Increasing incidence of Gram-negative organisms in bacterial agents isolated from diabetic foot ulcers. The Journal of Infection in Developing Countries. 2013 Oct 15;7(10):707-12. 26. Balde A. K., A, T. J., MD S., TM B., A M., K B. A., & S D. Hyperopia in young people: risk factors and prognosis at the CADES/O of the Donka National Hospital Guinea. Journal of Medical Research and Health Sciences. 2022; 5(8): 2135– 2144.