Ergin Funda TİMURKAYNAK, AYŞE HANDE ARSLAN, Kıvanç ŞEREFHANOĞLU, HALE TURAN

Diyabetik ayak infeksiyonlarının aerobik bakteriyolojik analizi

Bu prospektif çalışma ile Başkent Üniversitesi Konya Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezine başvuran diyabetik ayak infeksiyonu olan hastalarda aerobik etken mikroorganizmaların ve bunların antibiyotik duyarlılıklarının belirlenerek bu hastaların ampirik antibiyotik tedavilerine katkıda bulunulması amaçlanmıştır. Haziran 2003 ve Eylül 2005 tarihleri arasında başvuran diyabetik ayak infeksiyonu olan kırk beş hastadan etken olarak 61 bakteri izole edilmiştir. En sık rastlanan bakteri hastaların % 38’inden izole edilen Staphylococcus aureus olmuştur. Bu mikroorganizmayı Escherichia coli (% 20), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (% 20) ve Klebsiella spp. (% 18) izlemiştir. S.aureus izolatlarında metisilin direnci % 18 (3/17) olarak belirlenmiştir. Gram pozitif bakterilere karşı en etkili antibiyotik ise vankomisin olmuştur. Gram negatif izolatlara karşı en etkili antibiyotikler ise amikasin, meropenem, piperasilin-tazobaktam ve sefepim olarak belirlenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

Staphylococcus aureus, Diabetik ayak, Escherichia coli, Bakteriler, aerobik, Klebsiella, Metsilin-dirençli Staphylococcus aureus, İleriye dönük çalışma, Pseudomonas aeruginosa

Aerobic bacteriological analysis of diabetic foot infections

The aim of this prospective study is to give a contribution to empirical treatment of patients with diabetic foot infections, admitted to Baskent University, Konya Education and Research Center, by investigating the relative frequency of aerobic bacterial isolates and their in vitro antimicrobial susceptibility. A total of 61 bacteria were isolated from 45 patients with diabetic foot infections between June 2003 and September 2005. Staphylococcus aureus was the most common isolate, being recovered from 38 % of cases. It was followed by Escherichia coli (20 %), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (20 %) and Klebsiella spp. (18 %). Three of 17 (18 %) S.aureus isolates were found resistant to methicillin. Vancomycin was the most effective agent against Gram positive organisms. Amikacin, meropenem, piperacillin-tazobactam and cefepime were the most effective agents against Gram negative organisms.

Keywords:

Staphylococcus aureus, Diabetic Foot, Escherichia coli, Bacteria, Aerobic, Klebsiella, Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus, Prospective Studies, Pseudomonas aeruginosa,

PDF

___

1. Abdulrazak A, Bitar ZI, Al-Shamali AA, Mobasher LA: Bacteriological study of diabetic foot infections, J Diabetes Complications 2005;19(3): 138-41.
2. Bild DE, Selby JV, Sinnock P, Browner WS, Braveman P, Showstack JA: Lower-extremity amputation in people with diabetes: Epidemiology and prevention, Diabetes Care 1989;12(1):24-31.
3. Carvalho CB, Neto RM, Aragao LP, Oliveira MM, Nogueira MB, Forti AC: Diabetic foot infection. Bacteriologic analysis of 141 patients, Arq Bras Endocrinol Metabol 2004;48(3):398-405.
4. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute: Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing; CLSI/NCCLS Document M100-S15, CLSI, Wayne, PA (2005).
5. El-Tahawy AT: Bacteriology of diabetic foot, Saudi Med J 2000;21(4): 344-7.
6. Ertuğrul MB, Baktıroğlu S, Aksoy M, Çalangu S: Diyabetik ayak ve infeksiyonu, Klimik Derg 2004;17(1):3-12.
7. Frykberg RG: An evidence-based approach to diabetic foot infections, Am J Surg 2003;186(5A):44-54S.
8. Frykberg RG, Veves A: Diabetic foot infections, Diabetes Metab Rev 1996;12(3):255-70.
9. Ge Y, MacDonald D, Hait H, Lipsky B, Zasloff M, Holroyd K: Microbiological profile of infected diabetic foot ulcers, Diabet Med 2002;19(12):1032-4.
10. Goldstein EJ, Citron DM, Nesbit CA: Diabetic foot infections. Bacteriology and activity of 10 oral antimicrobial agents against bacteria isolated from consecutive cases, Diabetes Care 1996;19(6):638-41.
11. Lipsky BA: A report from the international consensus on diagnosing and treating the infected diabetic foot, Diabetes Metab Res Rev 2004;20 (Suppl 1):68-77S.
12. Lipsky BA, Berendt AR, Deery HG et al: IDSA guidelines. Diagnosis and treatment of diabetic foot infections, Clin Infect Dis 2004;39(7):885- 910.
13. Lipsky BA, Stoutenburgh U: Daptomycin for treating infected diabetic foot ulcers: Evidence from a randomized, controlled trial comparing daptomycin with vancomycin or semi-synthetic penicillins for complicated skin and skin-structure infections, J Antimicrob Chemother 2005;55(2): 240-5.
14. Mills JL, Beckett WL, Taylor SM: The diabetic foot: Consequences of delayed treatment and referral, South Med J 1991;84(8): 970-4.
15. Pathare NA, Bal A, Talvalkar GV, Antani DU: Diabetic foot infections: A study of microorganisms associated with the different Wagner grades, Indian J Pathol Microbiol 1998;41(4):437-41.
16. Swartz MN, Pasternack MS: Cellulitis and subcutaneous tissue infections, “Mandell GL, Bennett JE, Dolin R (eds): Principles and Practice of Infectious Diseases, 6.baskı” kitabında s.1172, Churchill Livingstone Co., Philadelphia (2005).
17. Tentolouris N, Jude EB, Smirnof I, Knowles EA, Boulton AJ: Methicillinresistant Staphylococcus aureus: An increasing problem in a diabetic foot clinic, Diabet Med 1999;16(9):767-71.
18. Unachukwu CN, Obunge OK, Odia OJ: The bacteriology of diabetic foot ulcers in Port Harcourt, Nigeria, Niger J Med 2005;14(2):173-6.