Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12188/33390
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorJovchevski, Radomiren_US
dc.contributor.authorPopovska jovanovska, Kakjaen_US
dc.contributor.authorTodosovska Ristovska, Anetaen_US
dc.contributor.authorLameski, Majaen_US
dc.contributor.authorPreshova, Ardianen_US
dc.contributor.authorSelmani, Muminen_US
dc.contributor.authorNedelkoska, Saraen_US
dc.contributor.authorVeljanovski, Hristijanen_US
dc.contributor.authorGjoshevska, Marijaen_US
dc.date.accessioned2025-05-05T10:33:30Z-
dc.date.available2025-05-05T10:33:30Z-
dc.date.issued2022-08-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12188/33390-
dc.description.abstractAcinetobacter baumannii and Pseudomonas aeruginosa are commensal which commonly colonize humans. As a result of their ubiquitous nature, reservoirs in hospital environment and resistance to many antimicrobial agents they are responsible for hospital – acquired infections. Additionally treatment of these infections is difficult because of the ability for biofilm formation. Aim of the paper was to determine the association between biofilm formation on medical devices and antibiotic resistance profile, compared to respiratory samples in clinical isolates of Acinetobacter baumannii and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Material and methods: The study comprised 50 clinical samples (36 from medical devices and 14 as а control group from respiratory secretions). Acinetobacter baumannii and Pseudomonas aeruginosa were identified by routine microbiological methods. Modification of the microtiter plate assay described by Stepanovic et al. was used to investigate the formation of biofilm. The antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed according to EUCAST guidelines. Results: Of the 50 analyzed strains, 16 (32%) were non-biofilm producers, and 34 (68%) were producing biofilms. Out of these, 29 (58%) were from medical devices, and 5 (10%) from the control group. Acinetobacter baumannii showed biofilm formation in 19 (67.9%), of which 17 (60.7%) from medical devices, and 2 (7.1%) from control group. Pseudomonas aeruginosa produced biofilm in 15 (68.1%), of which 12 (54.5%) from medical devices, and 3 (13.6%) from the control group. Multidrug resistance was detected in 40 (80%). All strains of Acinetobacter baumannii were multidrug resistant (MDR). For Pseudomonas aeruginosa, 11 (73.3%) biofilm forming isolates were MDR, and 1 (14.2%) non-biofilm forming isolate was MDR. Conclusion: Biofilm production was higher in strains from medical devices. Eighty percent of isolates were MDR. This is a serious challenge for treatment of these hospital-acquired infections.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherИнститут за јавно здравје на Република Македонија = Institute of public health of Republic of Macedoniaen_US
dc.relation.ispartofАрхиви на јавното здравје = Archives of Public Healthen_US
dc.subjectbiofilmen_US
dc.subjecthospital pathogensen_US
dc.subjectmultidrug resistanceen_US
dc.titleDetection of Biofilm Production and Antimicrobial Susceptibility in Clinical Isolates of Acinetobacter baumannii and Pseudomonas aeruginosaen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.3889/aph.2022.6053-
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
crisitem.author.deptFaculty of Medicine-
Appears in Collections:Faculty of Medicine: Journal Articles
Show simple item record

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.