Comparison of four different methods for detection of biofilm formation by uropathogens
Context: Urinary tract infection (UTI) is one of the most common infectious diseases encountered in clinical practice. Emerging resistance of the uropathogens to the antimicrobial agents due to biofilm formation is a matter of concern while treating symptomatic UTI. However, studies comparing differ...
Main Authors: | , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
2016-01-01
|
Series: | Indian Journal of Pathology and Microbiology |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://www.ijpmonline.org/article.asp?issn=0377-4929;year=2016;volume=59;issue=2;spage=177;epage=179;aulast=Panda |
id |
doaj-c88cc2d396fe4f93ac9897dff90ccd72 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-c88cc2d396fe4f93ac9897dff90ccd722020-11-24T22:35:50ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsIndian Journal of Pathology and Microbiology0377-49292016-01-0159217717910.4103/0377-4929.182013Comparison of four different methods for detection of biofilm formation by uropathogensPragyan Swagatika PandaUma ChaudharySurya K DubeContext: Urinary tract infection (UTI) is one of the most common infectious diseases encountered in clinical practice. Emerging resistance of the uropathogens to the antimicrobial agents due to biofilm formation is a matter of concern while treating symptomatic UTI. However, studies comparing different methods for detection of biofilm by uropathogens are scarce. Aims: To compare four different methods for detection of biofilm formation by uropathogens. Settings and Design: Prospective observational study conducted in a tertiary care hospital. Materials and Methods: Totally 300 isolates from urinary samples were analyzed for biofilm formation by four methods, that is, tissue culture plate (TCP) method, tube method (TM), Congo Red Agar (CRA) method and modified CRA (MCRA) method. Statistical Analysis: Chi-square test was applied when two or more set of variables were compared. P < 0.05 considered as statistically significant. Considering TCP to be a gold standard method for our study we calculated other statistical parameters. Results: The rate of biofilm detection was 45.6%, 39.3% and 11% each by TCP, TM, CRA and MCRA methods, respectively. The difference between TCP and only CRA/MCRA was significant, but not that between TCP and TM. There was no difference in the rate of biofilm detection between CRA and MCRA in other isolates, but MCRA is superior to CRA for detection of the staphylococcal biofilm formation. Conclusions: TCP method is the ideal method for detection of bacterial biofilm formation by uropathogens. MCRA method is superior only to CRA for detection of staphylococcal biofilm formation.http://www.ijpmonline.org/article.asp?issn=0377-4929;year=2016;volume=59;issue=2;spage=177;epage=179;aulast=PandaBiofilm, detection, four, methods, uropathogen |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Pragyan Swagatika Panda Uma Chaudhary Surya K Dube |
spellingShingle |
Pragyan Swagatika Panda Uma Chaudhary Surya K Dube Comparison of four different methods for detection of biofilm formation by uropathogens Indian Journal of Pathology and Microbiology Biofilm, detection, four, methods, uropathogen |
author_facet |
Pragyan Swagatika Panda Uma Chaudhary Surya K Dube |
author_sort |
Pragyan Swagatika Panda |
title |
Comparison of four different methods for detection of biofilm formation by uropathogens |
title_short |
Comparison of four different methods for detection of biofilm formation by uropathogens |
title_full |
Comparison of four different methods for detection of biofilm formation by uropathogens |
title_fullStr |
Comparison of four different methods for detection of biofilm formation by uropathogens |
title_full_unstemmed |
Comparison of four different methods for detection of biofilm formation by uropathogens |
title_sort |
comparison of four different methods for detection of biofilm formation by uropathogens |
publisher |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications |
series |
Indian Journal of Pathology and Microbiology |
issn |
0377-4929 |
publishDate |
2016-01-01 |
description |
Context: Urinary tract infection (UTI) is one of the most common infectious diseases encountered in clinical practice. Emerging resistance of the uropathogens to the antimicrobial agents due to biofilm formation is a matter of concern while treating symptomatic UTI. However, studies comparing different methods for detection of biofilm by uropathogens are scarce. Aims: To compare four different methods for detection of biofilm formation by uropathogens. Settings and Design: Prospective observational study conducted in a tertiary care hospital. Materials and Methods: Totally 300 isolates from urinary samples were analyzed for biofilm formation by four methods, that is, tissue culture plate (TCP) method, tube method (TM), Congo Red Agar (CRA) method and modified CRA (MCRA) method. Statistical Analysis: Chi-square test was applied when two or more set of variables were compared. P < 0.05 considered as statistically significant. Considering TCP to be a gold standard method for our study we calculated other statistical parameters. Results: The rate of biofilm detection was 45.6%, 39.3% and 11% each by TCP, TM, CRA and MCRA methods, respectively. The difference between TCP and only CRA/MCRA was significant, but not that between TCP and TM. There was no difference in the rate of biofilm detection between CRA and MCRA in other isolates, but MCRA is superior to CRA for detection of the staphylococcal biofilm formation. Conclusions: TCP method is the ideal method for detection of bacterial biofilm formation by uropathogens. MCRA method is superior only to CRA for detection of staphylococcal biofilm formation. |
topic |
Biofilm, detection, four, methods, uropathogen |
url |
http://www.ijpmonline.org/article.asp?issn=0377-4929;year=2016;volume=59;issue=2;spage=177;epage=179;aulast=Panda |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT pragyanswagatikapanda comparisonoffourdifferentmethodsfordetectionofbiofilmformationbyuropathogens AT umachaudhary comparisonoffourdifferentmethodsfordetectionofbiofilmformationbyuropathogens AT suryakdube comparisonoffourdifferentmethodsfordetectionofbiofilmformationbyuropathogens |
_version_ |
1725722839892361216 |