Indan Journal of Medical Research Indan Journal of Medical Research Indan Journal of Medical Research Indan Journal of Medical Research
  Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login  
  Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size Users Online: 1204       

   Table of Contents      
CORRESPONDENCE
Year : 2015  |  Volume : 141  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 491-492

Defining multidrug resistance in Gram-negative bacilli


Department of Microbiology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences Ponekkara, Kochi 682 041, Kerala, India

Date of Web Publication24-Jun-2015

Correspondence Address:
V Anil Kumar
Department of Microbiology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences Ponekkara, Kochi 682 041, Kerala
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0971-5916.159318

Rights and Permissions

How to cite this article:
Kumar V A, Khan S. Defining multidrug resistance in Gram-negative bacilli. Indian J Med Res 2015;141:491-2

How to cite this URL:
Kumar V A, Khan S. Defining multidrug resistance in Gram-negative bacilli. Indian J Med Res [serial online] 2015 [cited 2020 May 28];141:491-2. Available from: http://www.ijmr.org.in/text.asp?2015/141/4/491/159318

Sir,

We read with interest the article by Shenoy and colleagues [1] on bla ndm-1 gene in multidrug resistant (MDR) Gram-negative bacilli. In a country with 60-80 per cent prevalence of extended spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) among hospital Gram-negative isolates with co-resistance to other classes of antimicrobials as high as 44 per cent to co-trimoxazole, 76 per cent to gentamicin, 88 per cent to tetracycline and 90 per cent to fluoroquinolones, the authors' report of only 1.48 per cent MDR Gram-negative bacilli in a tertiary care centre is surprising [2],[3] . There are certain points which need to be clarified:

  1. The definition of MDR is very vague and without any reference in the article [1] . MDR, in literal terms means 'resistant to more than one antimicrobial agent', but a standardized definition for MDR has not yet been agreed upon by the medical community. There are many definitions that are currently being used to characterize patterns. The most practical definition used for Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria is 'resistant to three or more antimicrobial classes' [4] . Selecting Gram-negative isolates resistant to 1 [st] and 2 [nd] line antibiotics by standard disk diffusion test was very difficult as isolates were from different sites which had different antibiotics in their 1 [st] and 2 [nd] line of treatment. It is important for the authors to clearly define their criteria for MDR Gram-negative isolates as they have reported a low percentage of MDR Gram-negative isolates, and also that 93.24 per cent of these were phenotypically MBL producers, which is very alarming.
  2. The authors did not define how the carbapenamase producers were initially screened. Only imipenem (IPM) was tested by disk diffusion method. So how did the authors determine "variable carbapenem resistance"?. It will be interesting to see what type of variable carbapenem resistance was seen. They also need to mention all the carbapenems tested in their study and their MIC (minimum inhibitory concentration) at least as generated by Vitek 2 Compact 60.
  3. What the authors have described in the Material & Methods section is combined-disk test, not the double disk synergy test (DDST). In the DDST, an IPM (10 µg) disk is placed 20 mm (center to center) from a blank disk containing 10 µl of 0.1 M (292 µg) EDTA. Enhancement of the zone of inhibition in the area between the two disks is considered positive for an MBL [5] .
  4. Table II: Denominators used for calculating percentages are misleading, e.g: while the table may be interpreted as 5.7 per cent of isolates of Acinetobacter baumannii were bla ndm-1 positive; the actual percentage is 20 per cent. The authors mentioned that 14.7 per cent of Escherichia coli isolates were NDM-1 positive in their study but the Table showed that 50 per cent (5/10) of the MDR E.coli were NDM-1 positive. We are unable to understand what the authors wish to convey through the current percentages in Table II ? What does 115.38 per cent of tracheal aspirate mean; as well as 105 per cent of total isolates?
  5. Tigecycline resistant isolates need to be identified as Pseudomonas, Providencia and Burkholderia isolates are known to have higher MICs for tigecycline [6] .


 
   References Top

1.
Shenoy KA, Jyothi EK, Ravikumar R. Phenotypic identification & molecular detection of bla ndm-1 gene in multidrug resistant Gram-negative bacilli in a tertiary care centre. Indian J Med Res 2014; 139 : 625-31.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Chaudhuri BN, Rodrigues C, Balaji V, Iyer R, Sekar U, Wattal C, et al. Incidence of ESBL producers amongst Gram-negative bacilli isolated from intra-abdominal infections across India (based on SMART study, 2007 data). J Assoc Physicians India 2011; 59 : 287-92.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Jain A, Roy I, Gupta MK, Kumar M, Agarwal SK.Prevalence of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Gram-negative bacteria in septicaemic neonates in a tertiary care hospital. J Med Microbiol 2003; 52 (Pt 5): 421-5.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Magiorakos AP, Srinivasan A, Carey RB, Carmeli Y, Falagas ME, Giske CG, et al. Multidrug-resistant, extensively drug-resistant and pandrug-resistant bacteria: an international expert proposal for interim standard definitions for acquired resistance. Clin Microbiol Infect 2012; 18 : 268-81.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Franklin C, Liolios L, Peleg AY. Phenotypic detection of carbapenem-susceptible metallo-beta-lactamase-producing gram-negative bacilli in the clinical laboratory. J Clin Microbiol 2006; 44 : 3139-44.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Stein GE, Craig WA. Tigecycline: a critical analysis. Clin Infect Dis 2006; 43 : 518-24.  Back to cited text no. 6
    



This article has been cited by
1 Antibacterial potential of Ni-doped zinc oxide nanostructure: comparatively more effective against Gram-negative bacteria including multi-drug resistant strains
Atanu Naskar,Sohee Lee,Kwang-sun Kim
RSC Advances. 2020; 10(3): 1232
[Pubmed] | [DOI]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
    References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed845    
    Printed5    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded264    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 1    

Recommend this journal