Out of 601 patients, the total numbers of female were 345 and male were 256.The total number of diabetic were 250 (41.6%) and 351(58.4%) were non diabetic. Out of 250 diabetic, 111were female (44.4%) and 139 were male (55.6%). Likewise from 351 non diabetic patient, 234(66.7%) were female and 117(33.3%) were male.
Among the total number of significant growth 78(13%), 41(6.8%) shows significant growth in diabetic was found higher than that of non-diabetic 37(6.2%).
Table 1
Significant bacterial growth in comparison with diabetic and non-diabetic patients
| Insignificant Growth | Significant Growth | Total |
Diabetic | 209 | 41 | 250 |
Non Diabetic | 314 | 37 | 351 |
Total | 523 | 78 | 601 |
Significant growth was found higher above 45 years of age in case of diabetic and 25 to 45 years of age in case of non-diabetic. There is lesser significant growth in diabetic among category of less than 25 years than that of non-diabetic.
Table 2
Age wise distribution of significant growth.
Age Group (years) | Diabetic | Non Diabetic |
< 25 | 3 | 8 |
25–45 | 11 | 18 |
> 45 | 27 | 11 |
Total | 41 | 37 |
Table 3
Bacteria | Diabetic | Non diabetic |
E. coli | 23(56.09%) | 31(83.78%) |
S. aureus | 7(17.70%) | 1(2.70%) |
S. saprophyticus | 6(14.63%) | 1(2.70%) |
Proteus spp. | 4(9.75%) | 1(2.70%) |
Klebsiella spp. | 1(2.43%) | 2(5.43%) |
Enterobacter spp. | 0.00% | 1(2.70%) |
Total | 100% | 100% |
From the significant growth, the prevalence of E. coli was higher in both diabetic (56.09%) and non-diabetic (83.78%) patients. Overall prevalence of E. coli, S. aureus, S. saprophyticus, Proteus spp. were found higher in diabetic than non-diabetic. But the prevalence of Klebsiella spp. Enterobacter spp. were higher in non-diabetic than diabetic patients.
Table 4
Isolated gram negative uropathogens with different antibiotics
Organisms N = 63 | Patient type | E. coli | Proteus spp. | Klebsiella spp. | Enterobacter spp. |
Antibiotics | N = 54 DM = 23 NDM = 31 | N = 5 DM = 4 NDM = 1 | N = 3 DM = 1 NDM = 2 | N = 1 DM = O NDM = 1 |
S | I | R | S | I | R | S | I | R | S | I | R |
Amikacin ( 30 mcg) | Diabetic | 14 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Non-diabetic | 21 | 1 | 9 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Ciprofloxacin (5 mcg) | Diabetic | 7 | 0 | 16 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Non-diabetic | 8 | 5 | 18 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Gentamicin ( 30 mcg) | Diabetic | 11 | 3 | 9 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Non-diabetic | 16 | 9 | 12 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Norfloxacin (10 mcg) | Diabetic | 5 | 2 | 16 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Non-diabetic | 11 | 2 | 18 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Nitrofurantoin (300 mcg) | Diabetic | 13 | 7 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Non-diabetic | 17 | 6 | 8 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Nalidixic acid (30mcg) | Diabetic | 3 | 0 | 20 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Non-diabetic | 7 | 2 | 22 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Cotrimoxazole (25 mcg) | Diabetic | 12 | 1 | 10 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Non-diabetic | 19 | 0 | 12 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Note: S-Sensitive, I-Intermediate, R-Resistant, DM = Diabetic Mellitus, NDM = Non-Diabetic Mellitus |
The total number of gram negative isolates in diabetics were 28 and non-diabetics were 35. Most sensitive drugs in diabetics were Amikacin (60.7%), Nitrofurantoin (53.5%), Cotrimoxazole (53.5%) and Gentamicin (50%). Likewise in non-diabetics most sensitive were Amikacin (68.5%), Cotrimoxazole (62.8%), Nitrofurantoin (54.2%) and Gentamicin (48.37%). Similarly most resistant drugs in diabetics were Nalidixic acid (78.57%), Norfloxacilin (64.28%), Ciprofloxacin (60.7%) and Cotrimoxazole (42.85%). In the same way in non-diabetics, resistant drugs were Nalidixic acid (68.57%), Ciprofloxacin (57.1%), Norfloxacin (54.28%) and Cotrimoxazole (37.14%).
In diabetics E.coli isolates were most sensitive to Amikacin (60.9%), Nitrofurantoin (56.5%), Cotrimoxazole (52.2%) and resistant to Nalidixic acid (87%), Norfoxacin (69.6%), Ciprofloxacin (69.6%). In non-diabetics all E.coli isolates were most sensitive to Cotrimoxazole (61.3%), Amikacin (60.9%), Nitrofurantoin (54.8%) and resistant to Nalidixic acid (71%), Norfloxacin (58.1%), and Cotrimoxazole (38%).
In diabetics Proteus spp. isolates were most sensitive to Gentamicin (75%), Ciprofloxacin (75%) and resistant to Norfloxacin (50%), Nalidixic acid (50%). In non-diabetics all Proteus isolates were 100% sensitive to all antibiotics.
In diabetic individuals, all Klebsiella isolates were sensitive to almost all antibiotics and did not show any resistant pattern. In non-diabetic all isolates were most sensitive to Cotrimoxazole (50%), Amikacin (50%), Nitrofurantoin (50%) and resistant to Nalidixic acid (100%).
Table 5
Isolated gram positive uropathogens with different antibiotics
Organisms N = 15 | Patient type | S. aureus N = 8,Diabetic = 7, Non-Diabetic = 1 | S. saprophyticus N = 7, Diabetic = 6, Non-Diabetic =1 |
Antibiotics | S | I | R | S | I | R |
Gentamicin (30mcg) | Diabetic | 6 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 1 |
Non-diabetic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Amikacin (30mcg) | Diabetic | 3 | 0 | 4 | 6 | 0 | 0 |
Non-diabetic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Azithromycin (15mcg) | Diabetic | 2 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 5 |
Non-diabetic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Cefotaxime (30mcg) | Diabetic | 5 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 2 |
Non-diabetic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
Cotrimoxazole (25mcg) | Diabetic | 5 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 3 |
Non-diabetic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
Vancomycin (30mcg) | Diabetic | 4 | 0 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 0 |
Non-diabetic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
Ofloxacin (5mcg) | Diabetic | 4 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 0 |
Non-diabetic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
Oxacilin (1mcg) | Diabetic | 3 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 5 |
Non-diabetic | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Ciprofloxacin (5mcg) | Diabetic | 5 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 0 |
Non-diabetic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Note: S-Sensitive, I- Intermediate, R-Resistant |
The total number of gram positive isolates in diabetic were 13 and non-diabetic were 2. Most sensitive drugs in diabetics were Gentamicin (76.92%), Vancomycin (76.92%), Amikacin (69.23%) and Cotrimoxazole (53.82%). Likewise in non-diabetics most sensitive drug were Azithromycin (100%) and Ciprofloxacin (100%). Similarly most resistant drugs in diabetic were Amikacin (69.23%), Oxacilin (69.23%) and Azithromycin (69.23%). In the same way in non-diabetics resistant drugs were Cotrimoxazole (7.69%), and Oxacilin (7.69%).
In diabetic, Staphylococcus aureus isolates were most sensitive to Gentamicin (85.7%), Cefotaxime (71.4%), Cotrimoxazole (71.4%) and Ciprofloxacin (71.4%) and resistant to Amikacin (57.1%), Oxacilin (57.1%), and Azithromycin (57.1%). Likewise in non-diabetic all isolates were 100% sensitive to Azithromycin, Gentamicin, Cefotaxime, Cotrimoxazole, Vancomycin and Ofloxacin and 100% resistant to Oxacilin.
In diabetics Staphylococcus saprophyticus isolates were most sensitive to Vancomycin (100%), Amikacin (100%), Ofloxacin (83.3%), Ciprofloxacin (83.3%) and resistant to Oxacilin (83.5%), Azithromycin (83.5%). Likewise in non-diabetics all isolates were most sensitive to Ciprofloxacin (100%), Azithromycin (100%) and 100% resistant to Cotrimoxazole, Oxacilin, Vancomycin, Cefotaxime, Amikacin and Ofloxacin.