CorrelationShip Between Complication of Diabetes And Biofilm Form By Bacterial Isolate Isolated From Diabetic Foot Ulcer (DFU)Among Iraqi Diabetic Patients
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36320/ajb/v10.i3.8104Keywords:
Diabetic foot ulcer (DFU), Biofilm, type of Bacterial isolateAbstract
Background:Diabetic Foot ulcer (DFU)are the most common economicproblems in diabetic patients (both type І and ІІ), Sothat’s more severe and longer cure than non-diabetic patients, that has many degree of ulcer as mild, moderate, or severewhich maybe leading to development of gangreneand it is characterized by many important pathological complications as Hypertension; Retinopathy; Nephropathy and Neuropathy.Objectives –Biofilm form by Bacterial isolate isolated from DFUandstudy their correlated with many important factors as gender; age; type of Diabetic; Duration of ulcer and complication of diabetes such as Hypertension; Retinopathy; Nephropathy and Neuropathy.
Material and methods –From 72 diabetic patients with DFUwho attended the canter forEndocrinology and Diabetes were collected swab samples ,used classical conventional techniques to culture all sample and Gram staining followed diagnostic by Vitek system, so biofilm detection by microtiter plate (Mtp), as well as the complication of diabetic were diagnosis by specialized physician.
Results –Total of diabetic foot patients were males dominant over (73.3% ) than female (26.3%) , second age group of 41- 60 years were most prevalence (54.4%) whilst (21%) in third age group (>61),So produced biofilm high percentage (54.4%) in male ,but (15.8%) in female as well as the second age group (41-60 ) have high form biofilm (55%) whereas both the first and third age group ( < 41 and > 61) have low percentage (22.5%), andtype ІІ more than type І in both duration (>10 year and < 10 year ) as ( 49 , 24.6 %) respectively in type ІІ ,and ( 8.8 , 17.5 %) respectively in type І , and biofilm formation was (15.8 %) of the bacteria isolated DFUof patients with diabetes type І whilst ( 54.1%) in type ІІ ,so biofilm were formed predominantly by diabetic patients with Nephropathy (30 % ) followed diabetic patients with Hypertension (28 % ) and Neuropathy ( 24.5% ) , whilst only ( 17.5 % ) with retinopathy , Soboth E.col and Klebsiella pneumoniae to be equally responsible for diabetic foot ulcer as percentage (20%) successive followed by Staphylococcus aureus (14% ) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa(10% ).
Conclusion –Diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) in males dominant over females also biofilm produced in male more than female and maximum number of DFU belonged to second age group of 41- 60 years,so second age group have high form biofilm than others, as well as type ІІ more than type І in both duration (>10 year and < 10 year),as well as Biofilm form by bacteria isolated from DFU of patients with diabetes type І more than type ІІ.
Biofilms formed predominantly by diabetic patients with Nephropathy followed diabetic patients with Hypertension and Neuropathy as well as both E.col and Klebsiella pneumoniae to be equally responsible for diabetic foot ulcer.
Downloads
References
Akhi, M.T., Ghotaslou, R., Asgharzadeh, M.(2015). “Bacterial etiology and antibiotic susceptibility pattern of diabetic foot infections in Tabriz, Iran,” GMS Hygiene and Infection Control, 10: 2015.
Al-Rubeaan, KH. ; Al Derwish, M.; Ouizi , S.; Youssef ,A.M; Subhani ,S.N and Ibrahim, H.I. and Alamri ,B.N.(2015). Diabetic Foot Complications and Their Risk Factors from a Large Retrospective Cohort Study.PLoS One. 2015; 10(5).
Al-Wahbi AM. The diabetic foot. In the Arab world. Saudi Med J. 2006;27: 147–153.
American Diabetes Association, “Standards of medical care in diabetes .2011,” Diabetes Care, 34(1): pp. S11–S61.
Boulton AJ, Vileikyte L, Ragnarson-Tennvall G, Apelqvist J. The global burden of diabetic foot disease. Lancet. 2005;366(9498):1719–1724.
Ceriello A. Postprandial hyperglycemia and diabetes complications: is it time to treat? Diabetes 2005;54:1-7.
Cheng YJ, Gregg EW, Kahn HS, Williams DE, De Rekeneire N, Narayan KMV. Peripheral insensate neuropathy—a tall problem for US adults? Am J Epidemiol. 2006;164: 873–880.
Collee JG, Fraser AG, Marmion BP.(2006). Practical Medical Microbiology. 14thed. New York: Churchill Livingstone.
Daniel, S. J. C., Gowthami, E. And Sowmiya, S., “Isolation and identification of bacterial pathogens from wounds of diabetic patients,” International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences, 2(11): pp. 72–77 (2013.
Gadepalli, R., Dhawan, B., Sreenivas, V., Kapil, A., Ammini, A.C., and Chaudhry, R.,“A clinico-microbiological study of diabetic foot ulcers in an Indian tertiary care hospital,” Diabetes Care, 29(8): pp. 1727– 1732 (2006).
Gangania, P.S. and Singh V.A. (2016). Bacteriological Profile of Diabetic Foot Infected Patients and their Susceptibility Pattern, Int. J. Pure App. Biosci. 4 (3): 172-178.
Hjelm K, Nyberg P, Apelqvist J. Gender influences beliefs about health and illness in diabetic subjects with severe foot lesions. J AdvNurs. 2002;40: 673–684.
Hosseini,M.S.;Ehsani, A.H.; osseinpanah,F.; Azizi, F.; Salami.M.; , Khedmat,H.2008. Skin Lesions in Type 2 Diabetic Patients. Iranian Journal of Dermatology, Vol 11, No 3.
Katsilambros N, Tentolouris N, Tsapogas P, Dounis E. Atlas of Diabetic Foot. Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell; 2003.
Kumar, A.; Jain, M.B. and DIAB F.,(2016). Type 1 diabetic foot complications, Journal of Diabetic Foot Complications; 8,1 (3):17-22.
Mendes, J. and Neves, J., “Diabetic foot infections: current diagnosis and treatment,” The Journal of Diabetic Foot Complications, 4(2): pp. 26–45, 2012.
Mohammed ,S. I. ; Mikhael,E.M. ; Ahmed ,F. T. ;Al-Tukmagi, H. F. and Jasim, A. L. (2016). Risk factors for occurrence and recurrence of diabetic foot ulcers among Iraqi diabetic patients, Diabet Foot Ankle; 7: 10.3402/dfa.v7.29605.
Moss SE, Klein R, Klein BE. The prevalence and incidence of lower extremity amputation in a diabetic population. Arch Intern Med. 1992;152: 610–616.
Nihad Khalawe Tektook.(2005).Bacteriological and Serological study in Diabetic patients with urinary tract infections and diabetic retinopathy. M.Sc. Thesis of Science in Biology. College of Science, University of AL – Mustansiriya.
Nihad Khalawe Tektook.(2015).InvestigationofsomegenesresponsibleforBiofilm FormationinStaphylococcusepidermidisIsolatedFrom clinicalsamples.degree of phdin in immunology;ScienceCollege ;Universityof AL- Mustansiriya, at Baghdad-Iraq.
Prompers, L.; Huijberts, M.; Schaper, N.; Apelqvist, J.; Bakker, K.; Edmonds, M.; Holstein, P.; Jude, E.; Jirkovska, A. and Mauricio, D. 2008. Resource utilisation and costs associated with the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers. Prospective data from the Eurodiale Study. Diabetologia, 51, 1826–1834.
Reiber GE, Ledoux WR. Epidemiology of Diabetic Foot Ulcers and Amputations: Evidence for Prevention, The Evidence Base for Diabetes Care. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2003. pp. 641–665. Available:
Stepanovic S, Vukovic D, Dakic I, Savic B, Svabic-Vlahovic M (2000). A modified microtiter-plate test for quantification of staphylococcal biofilm formation. J. Microbiol. Methods .40:175-179.
Tapp RJ, Shaw JE, de Courten MP, Dunstan DW, Welborn TA, Zimmet PZ. Foot complications in type 2 diabetes: An Australian population-based study. Diabetes Med. 2003;20:105–13.
Tapp RJ, Shaw JE, de Courten MP, Dunstan DW, WelbornTA,Zimmet PZ. Foot complications in type 2 diabetes: An Australian population-based study. Diabetes Med 2003; 20: 105_13.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2018 Hussein Thumad Al-kaisey
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
which allows users to copy, create extracts, abstracts, and new works from the Article, alter and revise the Article, and make commercial use of the Article (including reuse and/or resale of the Article by commercial entities), provided the user gives appropriate credit (with a link to the formal publication through the relevant DOI), provides a link to the license, indicates if changes were made and the licensor is not represented as endorsing the use made of the work.
