Naziya Salim¹, Baijayanti Mishra² and Deepa Revi³*

¹Assistant Professor, Medical Trust Institute of Medical Sciences, Ernakulam, India
²Professor, St Johns Medical College, Bangalore, India
³Associate Professor, Medical Trust Institute of Medical Sciences, Ernakulam, India

*Corresponding Author: Deepa Revi, Associate Professor, Medical Trust Institute of Medical Sciences, Ernakulam, India.

Received: December 07, 2021; Published: January 24, 2022

Abstract

Staphylococcus aureus is a common cause of nosocomial infection and biofilm is one of its important virulence factors. Biofilm is a group of microorganisms enclosed in a self-produced exopolysaccharide matrix. S. aureus biofilms have been extensively involved in several chronic untreatable and medical implants related infections. The treatment of biofilm infections is laborious and challenging. On this account, the study was undertaken to detect the biofilm production capacity and antibiotic susceptibility pattern in Staphylococcus aureus derived from various clinical samples. A total 100 S. aureus strains were isolated from various clinical samples and tested for production of biofilm using three methods namely Congo Red Agar Plate method (CRA), Microtiter Plate Method (MTP) and Tube Method (TM). Antibiotic susceptibility comparison between biofilm producers and non-producers were also performed by modified Kirby Bauer’s disc diffusion method. The results showed better correlation between MTP and TM when compared to CRA method. Of the 100 S. aureus strains 6% were strong biofilm producers, 11% were moderate, 47% were weak positive, and 36% were negative by MTP while 56% were strong positive, 26% were moderate positive and 18% were negative for biofilm by TM. The CRA method showed that only 8% were strong positive, 3% were moderate and rest all were negative for biofilm production. None of the S. aureus isolates was resistant to glycopeptides (Vancomycin). The resistance exhibited by S. aureus to penicillin, ciprofloxacin and erythromycin resistant was 100%, 70% and 62% respectively. The antibiotic resistant rate (biofilm producers v/s non producers) for penicillin (64% v/s 36%), erythromycin (38% v/s 24%), and ciprofloxacin (48% v/s 22%) revealed that biofilm producers were more resistant to all the tested antibiotics.

Keywords: Staphylococcus aureus; Biofilm; Microtiter Plate Method; Tube Method; Congo Red Agar Plate Method; Antibiotic Susceptibility Testing

References

1. Ji- Lu Sun., et al. “Growth properties of Staphylococcus aureus in biofilm formed on polystyrene plate”. African Journal of Microbiology Research13 (2012): 3284-3291.
2. Akim Socohou., et al. “Antibiotics Resistance and Biofilm Formation Capacity of Staphylococcus spp. Strains Isolated from Surfaces and Medicotechnical Materials". International Journal of Microbiology (2020): 6.
3. Sander Cores., et al. “Staphylococcus aureus biofilm formation at the physiologic glucose concentration depends on the S. aureus lineage”. BMC Microbiology 9 (2009): 229.
4. Blais R Boles., et al. “Staphylococcal biofilm disassembly”. Trends in Microbiology 19 (2011): 449-455.
5. Rania M Abdel Halim., et al. “Detection of Biofilm Producing Staphylococci among Different Clinical Isolates and Its Relation to Methicillin Susceptibility”. Open Access Macedonian Journal of Medical Sciences8 (2018): 1335-1341.
6. Eiichi Ando Koichi Monden., et al. “Biofilm Formation among Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Isolates from Patients with Urinary Tract Infection”. Acta Medica Okayama 58 (2004): 207-214.
7. Freeman DJ., et al. “New method for detecting slime production by coagulase negative staphylococci”. Journal of Clinical Pathology 42 (1989): 872-874.
8. T Mathur., et al. “Detection of biofilm formation among the clinical isolates of Staphylococci: An evaluation of three different screening methods”. Indian Journal of Medical Microbiology 24 (2006): 25-29.
9. Performance Standard for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing, 15^th International supplement testing M 100- S 15.Wayne (CLSI); Clinical Laboratory Standard Institute (CLSI) (2005).
10. Dr MK Lalitha. “Methods of Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing”. In: Manual on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (2004): 7.
11. Harika K., et al. “Detection of Biofilm Production and Its Impact on Antibiotic Resistance Profile of Bacterial Isolates from Chronic Wound Infections”. Journal of Global Infectious Diseases3 (2020): 129-134.
12. Panda PS., et al. “Comparison of four different methods for detection of biofilm formation by uropathogens. Indian Journal of Pathology and Microbiology 2 (2016): 177-179.
13. Afreenish Hassan., et al. “Evaluation of different detection methods of biofilm formation in the clinical isolates”. The Brazilian Journal of Infectious Diseases 15 (2011): 305-311.
14. Ramakrishna Pai., et al. “Biofilm: Comparison between the Staphylococcus aureus and coagulase negative staphylococcus species isolated from a rural medical college hospital in North Kerala, India”. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences 1 (2014): 23-29.
15. Veronica Folliero., et al. “Evaluation of Antibiotic Resistance and Biofilm Production among Clinical Strain Isolated from Medical Devices". International Journal of Microbiology (2021): 11.
16. Samant Sharvari A and Pai Chitra G. “Evaluation of Different Detection Methods Of Biofilm Formation In Clinical Isolates Of Staphylococci”. International Journal of Pharma and Bio Sciences4 (2012): 724-733.

Citation

Citation: Deepa Revi., et al. “Evaluation of Biofilm Production and Antibiotic Resistance Pattern Between Biofilm Producing and Non-biofilm Producing Isolates of Staphylococcus aureus”.Acta Scientific Medical Sciences 6.3 (2022): 147-152.

Copyright

Copyright: © 2022 Deepa Revi., et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.