Quesada-Gómez C, Rodríguez-Cavallini E, Gamboa-Coronado MM

Language: Spanish
References: 14
Page: 89-95
PDF size: 310.98 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction. Anaerobic bacteria are important etiological agents of infections linked to human morbidity and mortality. Nevertheless, the limited development of most Costa Rican health care facilities with respect to the isolation and manipulation of anaerobic bacteria prevents the compilation of precise data on the prevalence of this sort of bacteria in the country.
Objective. To assess the occurrence of anaerobic bacteria in clinical samples collected in a regional hospital in Costa Rica.
Material and Methods. During 18 months, anaerobic bacteria were cultivated from diverse aspirates following a standardized protocol for sample collection and isolation developed for this study.
Results. Forty seven anaerobic bacteria were isolated from 22 of 46 samples analyzed (48% of prevalence). While 25 of these organisms exhibited Gram-negative staining (53%), 22 isolates were characterized as Gram-positive (47%). Most bacteria were allocated to the genus Bacteroides (42%), followed by Eggerthella (13%) and Propionibacterium (11%). A limited number of isolates was identified as Prevotella sp., Bifidobacterium sp., Porphyromonas sp., or Fusobacterium sp.
Discussion. Although traditional procedures for sample collection and isolation of anaerobic bacteria are painstaking, a diversity of anaerobic species, including very strict and fastidious species, was isolated with the practical method applied in the current investigation. On account of this remark, we urge others to implement our protocol in their health care facilities, as this would likely help to define more precisely the role that anaerobic bacteria play in clinical infections.

REFERENCES

1. Brook I. Anaerobic infections in children. Microbes and Infection 2002; 4: 1271-80.

2. Jousimies-Somer HR, Summanen P, Citron DM, Baron EJ, Wexler HM, Finegold SM. Anaerobic Bacteriology Manual. 6th ed. CA: Star Publising Co.; 2002 . p. 287.

3. Holdeman LV, Cato EP, Moore WEC. Anaerobe Laboratory Manual. 4th ed. Blacksburg: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University; 1977. p. 152.

4. Rodríguez M. Aislamiento, identificación y prueba de susceptibilidad a los antibióticos de bacterias anaerobias aisladas de muestras clínicas de pacientes del Hospital San Juan de Dios. San José: Trabajo Final de Graduación, Facultad de Microbiología, Universidad de Costa Rica; 1998. p. 28.

5. Durmaz B, Durmaz R, Tastekin N. Evaluation of culture results of specimenes from patients with suspected anaerobic infection. The New Microbiol 1999; 22: 155-9.

6. Ueno K, Kato N, Kato H. The status of research on anaerobes in Japan. Clin Infec Dis 2002; 35: S54-7.

7. Roberts SA, Shore KP, Paviour SD, Holland D, Morris AJ. Antimicrobial susceptibility of anaerobic bacteria in New Zeland: 1999-2003. J Antimicrob Chemother 2006; 57(5): 992-8.

8. Loivukene K, Naaber P. Antibiotic susceptibility of clinically relevant anaerobes in Estonia from 1999 to 2001. Anaerobe 2003; 9: 57-61.

9. Panigrahi D, Rotimi VO, Dhar R, Chugh TD, Dhar PM, Ghali A, et al. Anaerobic bacterial flora of intraabdominal infections and their antimicrobial susceptibility pattern in Kuwait. Anaerobe 2001; 7: 291-5.

10. Behra-Miellet J, Mory CF, Muller C, Choromarat M, Bézain MC, Bland S, et al. Antibiotic resistance among anaerobic Gram-negative bacilli: lessons from a french multicentric survey. Anaerobe 2003; 9: 105-11.

11. Forbes BA, Sahm DF, Weiisfeld AS. Bailey & Scott´s: Diagnostic Microbiology. 11th ed. New York: Mosby Inc.; 2002. p. 511-36.

12. Brook I. Anaerobic infections in childhood. USA: Hall Medical Publishers; 1983. p. 1-34, 91-280.

13. Fauci A, Braunwald E, Watson JD, Wilson JD, Isselbacher KJ, Martin JB, et al.: Principios de Medicina Interna. 14th ed. Madrid: McGraw-Hill Interamericana; 1998. p. 1132-41.

14. Roberts MC. Acquired tetracycline and/or macrolidelincosamides-streptogramin resistance in anaerobes. Anaerobe 2003; 9: 161-63.