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: Significant Uropathogens
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.