DocumentsDate added
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Shastrulagari S. Shivani1*,Srujan Kumar M2
1.Department of Pharmaceutics, Samskruti College of Pharmacy, Hyderabad, Telangana, India
2.Department of Pharmaceutics, Institute of Pharmaceutical and Research Center, Bhagwant University, Ajmer, Rajasthan, India
The name of the department(s) and institution(s) to which the work should be attributed:
Department of Pharmaceutics, Samskruthi College of Pharmacy
Address reprint requests to:
*Shastrulagari S. Shivani, House No: 6-1-700, Laxmi Nagar, Khairathabad, Hyderabad, Telangana, India
Article citation: Shivani SS, Srujan MK. Novel vesicular carrier for enhanced transdermal delivery of tramadol hydrochloride transfersomal gel. J Pharm Biomed Sci 2016;06(03):139–144.Available at www.jpbms.info
ABSTRACT
The main aim of current probe is to formulate and evaluate transfersomal gel for effective transdermal delivery of Tramadol Hcl. It was investigated by encapsulating the drug in various formulations which composed of various ratios of phosphatidyl choline, propylene glycol and ethanol prepared by lipid film hydration by conventional rotary evaporation method. The shapes of most Tramadol Hcl-containing Transfersomes were found to be spherical from SEM analysis. The percentage entrapment efficiency of optimised formulation T5 were found to be 92.71±0.56. The prepared formulations had been characterised for the loaded drug amount and vesicle size. The prepared vesicular systems were incorporated into 1% carbopol 934 gel. In vitro skin permeation studies were carried out by cellophane membrane using a Franz diffusion cell. Transfersome gel was found to increase the skin permeation and deposition showing a controlled effect.
KEYWORDS Tramadol hydrochloride, Transfersomes, transdermal delivery, entrapment efficiency, in vitro drug permeation studies
REFERENCES
1.Shaw JE, Chandrasekaran SK. In: Greaves MW, Shuster S (eds):Pharmacology of the Skin. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 1999. pp.115–22.
2.Modi CD, Bharadia PD. Transfersomes: new dominants for transdermal drug delivery. Am J Pharm Tech Res. 2012;2(3):71–91.
3.Swarnlata S, Gunjan J, Chanchal DK, Shailendra S. Development of novel herbal cosmetic cream with Curcuma longa extract loaded transfersomes for anti-wrinkle effect. African J Pharm Pharmacol. 2011;5(8):1054–62.
4.Cevc G, Gebauer D, Stieber J, Schätzlein A, Blume G. Ultraflexible vesicles, transfersomes, have an extremely low pore penetration resistance and transport therapeutic amounts of insulin across the intact mammalian skin. Biochim Biophy Acta. 1998;1368:201–15.
5.Benson HA. Transfersomes for transdermal drug delivery. Expert Opin Drug Deliv. 2006;3(6):727–37.
6.Patel R, Singh SK, Singh S, Sheth NR, Gendle R. Development and characterization of curcumin loaded transfersome for transdermal delivery. J Pharm Sci Res. 2009;1(4):71–81.
7.Cevc G, Blume G, Schätzlein A, Gebauer D, Paul A. The skin: a pathway for systemic treatment with patches and lipid-based agent carriers. Advance Drug Delivery Reviews. 1996; 18: 349–78.
8.Prajapati ST, Patel CG, Patel CN. Transfersomes: a vesicular carrier system for transdermal drug delivery. Asian J Biochem Pharmaceut Res. 2011;1(2):507–24.
9.Vinod KR, Kumar MS, Anbazhagan S, Sandhya S, Saikumar P,Rohit RT, et al. Critical issues related to transfersomes—novel vesicular system. Acta Sci Pol Technol Aliment. 2012;11(1):67–82.
10.Planas ME, Gonzalez P, Rodriguez S, Sanchez G, Cevc G. Noninvasive percutaneous induction of topical analgesia bya new type of drug carrier, and prolongation of local pain insensitivity by anesthetic liposomes. Anesth Analg. 1992;615–21.
11.Ramesh P. Transdermal delivery of drugs. Indian J Pharmacol. 1997;29:140–56.
12.Paul A, Cevec G, Bachhavat BK. Transdermal immunization with large proteins by means of ultradeformable drug carriers. Eur J Immunol. 1995;25:3521–4.
Statement of originality of work: The manuscript has been read and approved by all the authors, the requirements for authorship have been met, and that each author believes that the manuscript represents honest and original work.
Sources of funding: None.
Acknowledgement: The author wish to thank the management of Samskruti College of Pharmacy and Comprime Labs Pvt Ltd for providing the necessary facilities for carrying out the research work. Also want to thank my parents, brothers for their support and encouragement.
Competing interest / Conflict of interest: The author(s) have no competing interests for financial support, publication of this research, patents, and royalties through this collaborative research. All authors were equally involved in discussed research work. There is no financial conflict with the subject matter discussed in the manuscript.
Disclaimer: Any views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defense.
REVIEW ARTICLE
Ishwar Charan1,Kedar Nath1,Namrata Jagawat2,Akhil Kapoor3*
1 Department of Surgery, Sardar Patel Medical College and Associated Group of hospitals, Bikaner, Rajasthan, India
2 Department of Radiology, BJ Medical College and Associated Group of hospitals, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India
3 Department of Oncology, Sardar Patel Medical College and Associated Group of Hospitals, Bikaner, Rajasthan, India
Address reprint requests to
*Dr. Akhil Kapoor, Room No. 73, PG Boys Hostel, Bikaner, Rajasthan 334003, India
Article citation: Charan I, Nath K, Jagawat N, Kapoor A. Neoplasms arising from the salivary gland: a comprehensive review. J Pharm Biomed Sci 2016;06(03): 145–149.Available at www.jpbms.info
ABSTRACT
Salivary gland neoplasms make up 6% of all head and neck tumours. About 80% of parotid neoplasms are benign, with the relative proportion of malignancy increasing in the smaller glands. Carefully planned and executed surgical excision is the primary treatment for all primary salivary gland tumours. An electronic search of the Pubmed database was performed to obtain key literature in the field of salivary gland neoplasm and its management. The data from the relevant articles were studied and evaluated to write this review article.
KEYWORDS parotid tumour, salivary gland, neoplasm, management.
REFERENCES
1.Stenner M, Klussmann JP. Current update on established and novel biomarkers in salivary gland carcinoma pathology and the molecular pathways involved. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol.2009;266(3):333–41.
2.Straif K, Weiland SK, Bungers M, Holthenrich D, Keil U. Exposure to nitrosamines and mortality from salivary gland cancer among rubber workers. Epidemiology. 1999;10(6):786–7.
3.Zheng W, Shu XO, Ji BT, Gao YT. Diet and other risk factors for cancer of the salivary glands: a population-based case-control study. Int J Cancer. 1996 17;67(2):194–8.
4.Elledge R. Current concepts in research related to oncogenes implicated in salivary gland tumourigenesis: a review of the literature.Oral Dis. 2009;15(4):249–54.
5.Cheuk W, Chan JK. Advances in salivary gland pathology. Histopathology. 2007;51(1):1–20.
6.Mamlouk MD, Rosbe KW, Glastonbury CM. Paediatric parotid neoplasms: a 10 year retrospective imaging and pathology review of these rare tumours. Clin Radiol. 2015;70(3):270–7.
7.Yuan WH, Hsu HC, Chou YH, Hsueh HC, Tseng TK, Tiu CM. Grayscale and color Doppler ultrasonographic features of pleomorphic adenoma and Warthin’s tumor in major salivary glands.Clin Imaging. 2009;33(5):348–53.
8.Rong X, Zhu Q, Ji H, Li J, Huang H. Differentiation of pleomorphic adenoma and Warthin’s tumor of the parotid gland: ultrasonographic features. Acta Radiol. 2014;55(10):1203–9.
9.Adeyemi BF, Kolude BM, Akang EE, Lawoyin JO. A study of the utility of silver nucleolar organizer regions in categorization and prognosis of salivary gland tumors. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2006;102(4):513–20.
10.Skalova A, Sima R, Kaspirkova-Nemcova J, Simpson RH, Elmberger G, Leivo I, et al. Cribriform adenocarcinoma of minor salivary gland origin principally affecting the tongue: characterization of new entity. Am J Surg Pathol. 2011;35(8):1168–76.
11.Jaehne M, Roeser K, Jaekel T, Schepers JD, Albert N, Loning T.Clinical and immunohistologic typing of salivary duct carcinoma: a report of 50 cases. Cancer. 2005 15;103(12):2526–33.
12.Johnson JT, Ferlito A, Fagan JJ, Bradley PJ, Rinaldo A. Role of limited parotidectomy in management of pleomorphic adenoma.J Laryngol Otol. 2007;121(12):1126–8.
13.Kim WS, Lee HS, Park YM, et al. Surgical outcomes of parotid cancer: a 10-year experience. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2012;147(2 Suppl):180–1.
14.Eneroth CM, Hamberger CA. Principles of treatment of different types of parotid tumors. Laryngoscope. 1974;84(10):1732–40.
15.Terhaard CH, Lubsen H, Van der Tweel I, Hilgers FJ, Eijkenboom WM, Marres HA, et al. Salivary gland carcinoma: independent prognostic factors for locoregional control, distant metastases, and overall survival: results of the Dutch head and neck oncology cooperative group. Head Neck. 2004;26(8):681–92; discussion 692–3.
16.Wax MK, Kaylie DM. Does a positive neural margin affect outcome in facial nerve grafting? Head Neck. 2007;29(6):546–9.
17.Magnano M, Gervasio CF, Cravero L, Machetta G, Lerda W,Beltramo G. Treatment of malignant neoplasms of the parotid gland. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1999;121(5):627–32.
18.Renehan AG, Gleave EN, Slevin NJ, McGurk M. Clinico-pathological and treatment-related factors influencing survival in parotid cancer. Br J Cancer. 1999;80(8):1296–300.
19.Iseli TA, Karnell LH, Preston TW, Graham SM, Funk GF, Buatti JM, et al. Facial nerve sacrifice and radiotherapy in parotid adenoid cystic carcinoma. Laryngoscope. 2008;118(10):1781–6.
20.Casler JD, Conley JJ. Surgical management of adenoid cystic carcinoma in the parotid gland. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1992;106(4):332–8.
Statement of originality of work: The manuscript has been read and approved by all the authors, the requirements for authorship have been met, and that each author believes that the manuscript represents honest and original work.
Sources of funding: None.
Competing interest / Conflict of interest: The author(s) have no competing interests for financial support, publication of this research, patents, and royalties through this collaborative research. All authors were equally involved in discussed research work. There is no financial conflict with the subject matter discussed in the manuscript. The first two authors contributed equally to the manuscript.
Disclaimer: Any views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defense.
Original article
Faiz Rashid Abayechi1*
1 College of Medicine, Al Iraqia University,Baghdad, Iraq
Address reprint requests to
*Dr. Faiz Rashid Abayechi, Lecturer,College of Medicine, Al Iraqia University,Baghdad, Iraq
Article citation: Abayechi FR. Efficacy and tolerability of fixed dose combination valsartan/amlodipine to achieve blood pressure target in Iraqi hypertensive patients. J Pharm Biomed Sci 2016;06(03):184–188.Available at www.jpbms.info
ABSTRACT
Background Fixed dose combinations (FDCs) are one of the options for improving blood pressure (BP) goal attainment. However, it has not been studied previously in Iraqi patients.
Objective The aim of the study is to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of FDC valsartan/
amlodipine (Val/Aml) in a group of Iraqi hypertensive patients.
Patients and Methods One hundred and eighteen hypertensive patients were recruited from a health centre, male were 49 and female were 69 with a mean age of 49.1 years.
In patients whose BP was not controlled on previous antihypertensive therapy, FDC of Val/Aml at a dose of 160/5 mg were given, and allowed to be up titrated to 160/10 mg once daily with or without hydrochlorothiazide of 12.5–25 mg. Patients were followed for a minimum of 12 weeks. The efficacy and tolerability of this medication were studied among the study group.
Results Among the study group, 95 patients (80.50%) (P < 0.001) reached their BP target[<140 ⁄ 90 mmHg for uncomplicated hypertension, (<130 ⁄ 80 mmHg for patients with diabetes)] over the 12-week study period; 24 patients (20.33%) who failed to reach BP target [19 patients (16.1%) were lost to follow up, two patients (1.69%) discontinued their treatment due to medication side effects (one patient had lower limb edema, the other patients had dizziness) and three patients (2.54%) were non-compliant to the treatment plan].
Conclusion Treatment with the FDC Val/Aml was associated with significant reductions in systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP), and a significant increase in the BP control rate with an excellent tolerability profile.
KEYWORDS fixed dose combination, blood pressure, antihypertensive treatment
REFERENCES
1. ALLHAT Officers and Coordinators for the ALLHAT Collaborative Research Group. The antihypertensive and lipid-lowering treatment to prevent heart attack trial. Major outcomes in high-risk hypertensive patients randomized to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or calcium channel blocker vs. diuretic: the antihypertensive and lipid-lowering treatment to prevent heart attack trial (ALLHAT). JAMA. 2002;288:2981–2997.
2. Lewington S, Clarke R, Qizilbash N, Peto R, Collins R; Prospective Studies Collaboration. Age-specific relevance of usual blood pressure to vascular mortality: a meta-analysis of individual data for one million adults in 61 prospective studies. Lancet.2002;360:1903–1913.
3. Mancia G, Laurent S, Agabiti-Rosei E, Ambrosioni E, Burnier M,Caulfield MJ, et al. Reappraisal of European guidelines on hypertension management: a European Society of Hypertension Task Force document. Blood Press. 2009;18:308–347.
4. Bramlage P. Fixed-dose combinations of renin-angiotensin blocking agents with calcium channel blockers or hydrochlorothiazide in the treatment of hypertension. Expert Opin Pharmaco Ther. 2009;10:1755–1767.
5. Sever PS, Messerli FH. Hypertension management 2011: optimal combination therapy. Eur Heart J. 2011;32:2499–2506.
6. Chrysant SG, Melino M, Karki S, Lee J, Heyrman R. The combination of olmesartan medoxomil and amlodipine besylate in controlling high blood pressure: COACH, a randomized, double-blind, placebocontrolled, 8-week factorial efficacy and safety study. Clin Ther. 2008;30:587–604.
7. Jamerson K, Weber MA, Bakris GL, Dahlöf B, Pitt B, Shi V, et al.Benazepril plus amlodipine or hydrochlorothiazide for hypertension in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:2417–2428.
8. Akazawa M, Fukuoka K. Economic impact of switching to fixeddose combination therapy for Japanese hypertensive patients:a retrospective cost analysis. BMC Health Serv Res. 2013;13:124.
9. Egan BM, Zhao Y, Axon RN. US trends in prevalence, awareness,treatment, and control of hypertension, 1988–2008. JAMA.2010;303(20):2043–2050.
10. Mancia G, de Backer G, Dominiczak A, Cifkova R, Fagard R,Germano G, et al. 2007 Guidelines for the Management of Arterial Hypertension: the task force for the management of arterial hypertension of the European Society of Hypertesnsion (ESH) and of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC).J Hypertens. 2007;25:1105–1187.
11. Oparil S, Lee J, Karki S, Melino M. Subgroup analyses of an efficacy and safety study of concomitant administration of amlodipine besylate and olmesartan medoxomil: evaluation by baseline hypertension stage and prior antihypertensive medication use. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 2009;54:427–436.
12. Weber MA, Julius S, Kjeldsen SE, Brunner HR, Ekman S, Hansson L,et al. Blood pressure dependent and independent effects of antihypertensive treatment on clinical events in the VALUE trial. Lancet. 2004;363(9426):2049–2051.
13. Law MR, Wald NJ, Morris JK, Jordan RE. Value of low dose combination treatment with blood pressure lowering drugs: analysis of 354 randomised trials. BMJ. 2003;326:1427–1431.
14. Smith TR, Glazer RD, Koren MJ, Wernsing M, Zhang Y. Combination therapy with amlodipine/valsartan in essential hypertension:a 52-week, randomised, open-label, extension study.Int J Clin Pract. 2010;64:1367–1374.
15. Hu D, Liu L, Li W. Efficacy and safety of valsartan/amlodipine single-pill combination in 11,422 Chinese patients with hypertension: an observational study. Adv Ther. 2014;31(7):762–775.
16. Ke YN, Huang J, Zhu JR; Valsartan/Amlodipine Single Pill Combination Study Group. Efficacy and safety of the single pill combination of valsartan 80 mg plus amlodipine 5 mg in mild to moderate essential hypertensive patients without adequate blood pressure control by monotherapy. Zhonghua Xin Xue Guan Bing Za Zhi. 2009;37:794–799.
17. Ke Y, Zhu D, Hong H, Zhu J, Wang R, Cardenas P, Zhang Y.Efficacy and safety of a single-pill combination of amlodipine/ valsartan in Asian hypertensive patients inadequately controlled with amlodipine monotherapy. Curr Med Res Opin.2010;26:1705–1713.
18. Calhoun DA, Lacourciere Y, Chiang YT, Glazer RD. Triple antihypertensive therapy with amlodipine, valsartan, and hydrochlorothiazide:a randomized clinical trial. Hypertension. 2009;54:32–39.
19. Fogari R, Zoppi A, Mugellini A, Corradi L, Lazzari P, Preti P, Derosa G. Efficacy and safety of two treatment combinations of hypertension in very elderly patients. Arch Gerontol Geriatr.2009;48(3):401–405.
20. Poldermans D, Glazes R, Kargiannis S, Wernsing M, Kaczor J, Chiang YT, Yen J, Gamboa R, Fomina I. Tolerability and blood pressure-lowering efficacy of the combination of amlodipine plus valsartan compared with lisinopril plus hydrochlorothiazide in adult patients with stage 2 hypertension.Clin Ther. 2007;29:279–289.
21. RL. Exforge: a new combination to treat hypertension. Pharma Note. 2008;23:1–11.
22. Allemann Y, Fraile B, Lambert M, Barbier M, Ferber P, Izzo JL Jr. Efficacy of the combination of amlodipine and valsartan in patients with hypertension uncontrolled with previous monotherapy: the exforge in failure after single therapy (EX-FAST) study. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2008;10:185–194.
23. Krzesinski JM, Cohen EP. Exforge (amlodipine/valsartan combination) in hypertension: the evidence of its therapeutic impact.Core Evid. 2010;4:1–11.
24. Makani H, Bangalore S, Romero J, Htyte N, Berrios RS, Makwana H, Messerli FH. Peripheral edema associated with calcium channel blockers: incidence and withdrawal rate: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. J Hypertens. 2011;29:1270–1280.
Statement of originality of work: The manuscript has been read and approved by all the authors, the requirements for authorship have been met, and that each author believes that the manuscript represents honest and original work.
Sources of funding: None.
Competing interest / Conflict of interest: The author(s) have no competing interests for financial support, publication of this research, patents, and royalties through this collaborative research.
All authors were equally involved in discussed research work. There is no financial conflict with the subject matter discussed in the manuscript.
Disclaimer: Any views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defense.
Original article
Abirami Lakshmy Jayachandran1*,Ravinder Thyagarajan2, Radhika Katragadda2, Leela K.V3,Suganthi M4, Lavanya K4, Hemalatha S4
1 Assistant Professor, Department of Microbiology, Karpaga Vinayaga Institute of Medical Sciences and Research Centre, Madhurantakam Taluk, Kanchipuram,Tamil Nadu, India
2 Professor, Department of Microbiology, Government Kilpauk Medical College Hospital, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
3 Assistant Professor, Department of Microbiology, Government Kilpauk Medical College Hospital, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
4 Associate Professor, Department of Microbiology, Government Kilpauk MedicalCollege Hospital, Chennai,Tamil Nadu, India
The name of the department(s) and institution(s) to which the work should be attributed:
Department of Microbiology, Government Kilpauk Medical College, Chennai, Tamil Nadu
Address reprint requests to
*Dr. Abirami Lakshmy J, Number 36: D Block, Viduthalai Nagar, Mudaliarpet, Puducherry, 605004, India
Article citation: Abirami Lakshmy J, Thyagarajan R, Radhika K, Leela KV, Suganthi M, Lavanya K, Hemalatha S. Biofilm formation and methicillin resistance among the Staphylococcus aureus causing burn wound infections in a tertiary care hospital: a comparative study of the antibiotic susceptibility pattern between biofilm producers and non biofilm producers. J Pharm Biomed Sci 2016;06(03):179–183.
Available at www.jpbms.info
ABSTRACT
Background Staphylococcus aureus is one of the common bacteria implicated in burn wound infections that possess the ability to form biofilms.
Aim The present study aims to isolate S. aureus to identify the Methicillin resistant Staphylococcal isolates, to compare the antibiotic susceptibility pattern between biofilm and non biofilm producers. It also aims to identify the biofilm producers by Microtitre plate method.
Settings and Design Observational study.
Materials and Methods A total of 58 S. aureus were isolated from burn wound infections. Antibiotic susceptibility testing was done by Kirby–Bauer disc diffusion method. Methicillin resistance was identified by cefoxitin disc method. All the isolates were screened for biofilm production by microtitre plate method. Statistical analysis: Fisher exact and Chi square tests. p < 0.005 is considered significant.
Results Out of the 58 isolates, 26 (44.8%) were identified as MRSA. Biofilm production was detected in 31 (53.4%) of the isolates. Good sensitivity for gentamicin 41 (70%), amikacin 42 (72.4%), cefotaxime 42 (72%) and erythromycin 37 (63.7%). There was no significant difference in the antibiotic susceptibility pattern between biofilm and non biofilm producers.
Conclusion All burn wounds should be screened for the presence of bacteria with biofilm forming ability along with the detection of drug resistance. This will support in the early identification and help in choosing the appropriate antibiotic.
KEYWORDS biofilm formation, burn wounds, Staphylococcus aureus
REFERENCES
1.Church D, Elsayed S, Reid O, Winston B, Lindsay R. Burn wound infections. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2006;19(2):403–434.
2.Agarwal A, Jain A. Association between drug resistance & production of biofilm in staphylococci. Indian J Med Res. 2012;135:562–564.
3.Kaur DC, Wankhede S. Biofilm formation and antimicrobial susceptibility pattern of methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus from wound infection. Asian Pac J Health Sci. 2014;1(4):322–328.
4.Kirketerp-Møller K, Jensen PØ, Fazli M, Madsen KG, Pedersen J, Moser C, et al. Distribution, organisation and ecology of bacteria in chronic wounds. J Clin Microbiol. 2008:46(8):2717–2722.
5.Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing: twenty-third informational supplement M100‑S23. PA, USA. 2013.
6.Anand KB, Agarwal P, Kumar S, Kapila K. Comparison of cefoxitin disc diffusion test, oxacillin screen agar and PCR for mecA gene for detection of MRSA. Indian J Med Microbiol; 2009:27(1):27–29.
7.EL Farren CA, Sekar A, Balakrishnan A, Shanmugam S,Arumugam P, Gopalswamy J. Prevalence of biofilm producing Staphylococcus epidermidis in the healthy skin of individuals in Tamil Nadu, India. Indian J Med Microbiol. 2013;31(1):19–23.
8.Grinholc M, Wegrzyn G, Kurlenda J. Evaluation of biofilm production and prevalence of the icaD gene in methicillin-resistant and methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus strains isolated from patients with nosocomial infections and carriers. FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol; 2007:50:375–379.
9.Mehta M. Bacterial isolates from burns wound infections and their antibiogram: a eight-year study. Indian J Plastic Surg.2007:40(1):25–28.
10.Okesola AO, Oni AA, Bakare RA. Prevalence and antibiotic sensitivity pattern of MRSA in Ibadan, Nigeria. J Hosp Infect.1999;41:74–75.
11.Ohadian Moghadam S, Pourmand MR, Aminharati F. Biofilm formation and antimicrobial resistance in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolated from burn patients, Iran. J Infect Dev Ctries. 2014;8(12):1511–1517.
12.Indrawattana N, Sungkhachat O, Sookrung N, Chongsanguan M, Tungtrongchitr A, et al. Staphylococcus aureus clinical isolates: antibiotic susceptibility, molecular characteristics, and ability to form biofilm. Biomed Res Int. 2013; 2013:314654.
13.Gad GF, El-Feky MA, El-Rehewy MS, Hassan MA, Abolella H et al. Detection of icaA, icaD genes and biofilm production by Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis isolated from urinary tract catheterized patients. J Infect Dev Ctries.2009;3(5):342–351.
14.Mathur T, Singhal S. Detection of biofilm formation among the clinical isolates of staphylococci: an evaluation of three different screening methods. Indian J Med Microbiol. 2006;24(1):25–29.
15.Ansari MA, Khan HM, Khan AA, Cameotra SS, Alzohairy MA. Anti-biofilm efficacy of silver nanoparticles against MRSA and MRSE isolated from wounds in a tertiary care hospital. Indian J of Med Microbiol. 2015;33(1):101–109.
16.Gogoi M, Sharma A, Hazarika NK. Biofilm formation by bacterial isolates from patients on indwelling medical devices. Indian J Med Microbiol. 2015;33(2):319–34.
17.Smith K, Perz A. Biofilm formation by Scottish isolates of Staphylococcus aureus. J Med Microbiol. 2008;57:1018–23.
18.Singh V, Chauhan PK, Bodh UA, Kaushal K, Iqbal A. Isolation and antibiogram pattern of methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus causing wound infection. Int J Anal Pharm Biomed Sci.2012;1(1):18–21.
19.Sasirekha B, Usha MS, Amruta AJ, Ankit S, Brinda N, Divya R. Evaluation and comparison of different phenotypic tests to detect methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus and their biofilm production. Int J Pharm Technol Res. 2012;4(2):532–541.
20.Sanchez CJ Jr, Mende K, Beckius ML, Akers KS, Romano DR et al. Biofilm formation by clinical isolates and the implications in chronic infections. BMC Infect Dis. 2013;13:47.
21.Jain A, Agarwal A. Biofilm production, a marker of pathogenic potential of colonizing and commensal staphylococci. J Microbiol Methods. 2009;76:88–92.
Statement of originality of work: The manuscript has been read and approved by all the authors, the requirements for authorship have been met, and that each author believes that the manuscript represents honest and original work.
Sources of funding: None.
Competing interest / Conflict of interest: The author(s) have no competing interests for financial support, publication of this research, patents, and royalties through this collaborative research. All authors were equally involved in discussed research work. There is no financial conflict with the subject matter discussed in the manuscript.
Disclaimer: Any views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defense.
Original article
Mishra Prakash K1*,Singh Narendra P2,Batra Prerna3,Kaur Iqbal R4
1MBBS, MD, Senior Resident, Department of Microbiology, University College of Medical Sciences and Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital,Dilshad Garden, 110095, Delhi, India
2MBBS, MD, Professor, Department of Microbiology, University College of Medical Sciences and Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital,Delhi, India
3 MBBS, MD, Department of Pediatrics,University College of Medical Sciences and Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital, Delhi, India
4 MBBS, MD Professor and HOD,Department of Microbiology, University College of Medical Sciences and Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital, Delhi, India
Address reprint requests to
*Dr. Prakash Kumar Mishra (MBBS,MD),
Senior Resident, Department of Microbiology, University College of
Medical Sciences and Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital, 90-D, Pocket-A, Dilshad Garden,110095, Delhi, India
Article citation: Prakash KM, Narendra PS,Prerna B, Iqbal RK. Bacteriological profile of acute pyogenic meningitis in pediatric age group from a tertiary care hospital of east Delhi. J Pharm Biomed Sci 2016;06(03):174–178. Available at www.jpbms.info
ABSTRACT
Background and Objectives Laboratory surveillance of causative microorganism is crucial to formulate rational empirical treatment and preventive strategies for potentially fatal acute pyogenic meningitis (APM). This study was aimed to identify the causative microorganism of APM in children admitted in a tertiary care hospital of east Delhi.
Materials and Methods Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) was collected from 300 suspected cases of APM and subjected to cytology, gram staining, biochemical analysis and culture.
Every fifth CSF sample was also subjected to antigen detection by latex agglutination test (LAT) for Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae, Neisseria meningitidis, Escherichia coli, group B Streptococcus and Taqman probe-based real time polymerase chain reaction (RTPCR) for S. pneumoniae, H. influenzae and N. meningitidis. Simultaneously, blood culture was also done from all these 300 cases.
Result From CSF, 19 microorganisms were isolated in which hospital-acquired multidrug resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (9) was most common. S. pneumoniae, H. influenzae, group B Streptococcus, E. coli, Staphylococcus aureus and Klebsiella were also identified
as a causative agent of APM. LAT detected microorganism in nine culture negative samples,
whereas RTPCR detected two additional microorganisms which were missed by LAT.
Conclusion This study highlights the emergence of MDR A. baumannii as a common agent of APM in hospital setting and emphasise on judicious use of antibiotics to prevent resistance.
KEYWORDS acute pyogenic meningitis, bacteriological profile, pediatric age group
REFERENCES
1.Laboratory methods for the diagnosis of meningitis caused by Neisseria meningitidis, Streptococcus pneumoniae, and Haemophilus influenzae. World Health Organization. (WHO/CDS/CSR/EDC/99.7) available from http://www.who.int/csr/resources/publications/meningitis/whocdscsredc997.pdf
2.Tang LM, Chen ST, Hsu WC, Lyu RK. Acute bacterial meningitis in adults: a hospital- based epidemiological study. QJM.1999;92:719–725.
3.Collee JG, Marr W, Fraser AG, Marmion BP, Simmons A. Mackie & McCartney Practical Medical Microbiology, 14th ed. Delhi:Churchill Livingstone; 1996.
4.Cockerill FR, Wikler MA, Bush K, Dudley MN, Eliopoulos GM,Hardy DJ, et al. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing. CLSI. 2010;30(1):40–104.
5.Corless CE, Guiver M, Borrow R, Jones VE, Fox AJ, Kaczmarski EB.Simultaneous detection of Neisseria meningitidis, Haemophilus influenzae, and Streptococcus pneumoniae in suspected cases of meningitis and septicemia using real-time PCR. J Clin Microbiol.2001;39(4):1553–1558.
6.Gaegas N, Hafed K, Aziz Al Khawlly M, Robenz GB, Gotshelish A.Bacterial meningitis in Egypt: serotyping of the isolated bacteria from CSF samples of the patients in tow hospitals of Cairo,1977–1978. Bull World Health Organ. 1983;61:501–512.
7.Salih MA, Khaleefa OH, Bushara M, Taha ZB, Musa ZA, Kamil I et al. Long-term sequelae of childhood acute bacterial meningitis in developing country. Scand J Infect Dis. 1991;23:175–182.
8.Muenchhoff M, Goulder PJR. Sex differences in pediatric infectious diseases. J Infect Dis. 2014;209(3):120–126.
9.Ahmed AA, Saleh MA, Ahmed HS. Post-endemic acute bacterial meningitis in Sudanes children. East Afr Med J. 1996;73:527–532.
10.Almoneef MJ, Memish Z, Khon Y, Kagall WA, Shaalan M.Childhood meningitis in Saudi Arabia. J Infect. 1998;2:157–160.
11.Garges HP, Moody MA, Cotton CM, Smith PB, Tiffany KF,Lenfestey R, et al. Neonatal meningitis: what is the correlation among cerebrospinal fluid cultures, blood cultures, and cerebrospinal fluid parameters? Pediatrics. 2006;117:1094–1100.
12.Steele RW, Marmer DJ, O’Brien MD, Tyson ST, Steele CR.Leukocyte survival in cerebrospinal fluid. J Clin Microbiol.1986;23:965–966.
13.Neuman MI, Tolford S, Harper MB. Test characteristics and interpretation of cerebrospinal fluid gram stain in children. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2008;27(4):309–313.
14.Kabra SK, Praveen Kumar, Verma IC, Mukherjee D, ChowdharyBH, Sengupta S, et al. Bacterial meningitis in India: an IJP survey. Indian J Pediatr. 1991;58:505–511.
15.Das BK, Gurubacharya RL, Mohapatra TM, Mishra OP. Bacterial antigen detection test in meningitis. Indian J Pediatr. 2003;70:799–801.
16.Sonavane A, Baradkar VP, Mathur M. Bacteriological profile of pyogenic meningitis in adults. Bombay Hosp J. 2008;50(3):452–455.
17.Saleem AF, Ahmed I, Mir F, Ali SR, Zaidi AK. Pan-resistant Acinetobacter infection in neonates in Karachi, Pakistan. J Infect Dev Ctries. 2009;4(1):30–37.
18.Talbot GH, Bradley J, Edwards JE Jr., Gilbert D, Scheld M, Bartlett JG. Bad bugs need drugs: an update on the development pipeline from the Antimicrobial Availability Task Force of the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2006;42:657–668.
19.Peleg AY, Seifert H, Paterson DL. Acinetobacter baumannii: emergence of a successful pathogen. Clin Microbiol Rev.2008;21:538–582.
20.Mirza IA, Hussain A, Abbasi SA, Malik N, Satti L, Farwa U. Ambubag as a source of Acinetobacter baumannii outbreak in an intensive care unit. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2011;21(3):176–178.
21.Jaiswal N, Singh M, Thumburu KK, Bharti B, Agarwal A, Kumar A, et al. Burden of invasive pneumococcal disease in children aged 1 month to 12 years living in South Asia: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2014;9:e96282.
22.Song JH, Lee NY, Ichiyama S, Yoshida R, Hirakata Y, Fu W,et al. Spread of drug- resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae in Asian countries: Asian Network for Surveillance of Resistant Pathogens (ANSORP) Study. Clin Infect Dis. 1999;28:1206–1211.
23.Wilder-Smith E, Chow KM, Kay R, Ip M, Tee N. Group B Streptococcal meningitis in adults: recent increase in Southeast Asia. Aust N Z J Med. 2000;30:462–465.
24.John AJP, Lalitha MK, Cherian T, Pai R, Thomas K, Steinhoff MC.A polymerase chain reaction-enzyme immunoassay for diagnosis of pneumococcal meningitis in children and adults. Indian J Med Res. 2001;113:48–52.
25.Wiswell TE, Baumgart S, Gannon CM, Spitzer AR. No lumbar puncture in the evaluation for early neonatal sepsis: will meningitis be missed? Pediatrics. 1995;119:803–806.
26.Johnson CE, Whitwell JK, Pethe K, Saxena K, Super DM. Term newborn who are at risk for sepsis: are lumbar punctures necessary? Pediatrics. 1997;99(4):E10.
Statement of originality of work: The manuscript has been read and approved by all the authors, the requirements for authorship have been met, and that each author believes that the manuscript represents honest and original work.
Sources of funding: None.
Competing interest / Conflict of interest: The author(s) have no competing interests for financial support, publication of this research, patents, and royalties through this collaborative research. All authors were equally involved in discussed research work. There is no financial conflict with the subject matter discussed in the manuscript.
Disclaimer: Any views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defense.