Contribution of biofilm and Cell Surface Hydrophobicity in the resistance of Pseudomonas aeruginosa from some Healthcare settings of Yaounde

Main Article Content

Yves Le Grand NAPA TCHUEDJI
YAP BOUM II
Emilia ENJEMA LYONGA
Sylvain SADO
Abraham NKOUE
Martha MESEMBE
Carole SAKE
Rosanne NGOME
Michelle Sandrine DJUIDJE KAMGUIA
Hortense GONSU KAMGA
François-Xavier ETOA

Abstract

Antibiotic resistance (ABR) is one of the priority problems around the world which affects the evolution of infectious diseases and leads to economic losses with a considerable impact on increased mortality and morbidity in low-resource countries. One of the bacteria most involved in resistance is Pseudomonas aeruginosa. It is a bacteria belonging to the ESKAPE group, for which there is an urgent and critical need for antibiotic development. The circulation of this bacteria in several countries has been the cause of many infections affecting all ages, patients and healthcare staff, and has promoted the spread of resistance in environmental and animal health. To investigate the determinants of resistance in Pseudomonsa aeruginosa, the aim of this work was to assess the correlation between biofilm, Cell Surface Hydrophobicity (CSH) and antibiotic resistance in clinical isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa circulating in Yaounde.


Methods: We conducted a cross sectional study from March 2019 to October 2021. We collected various samples including pus, urine, lochia, wound, bedsore and blood, from patients of the General Hospital of Yaounde (GHY), Central Hospital of Yaounde (CHY), University Teaching Hospital of Yaounde (UTHY) and Centre Pasteur du Cameroun (CPC). The hydrophobicity of the bacterial surfaces was determined by measuring the percentage of adhesion to xylene. Biofilm formation was assessed using the TCP method.  The correlation between CSH, biofilm production and ABR were determined. 


Results: We included 300 patients in this study. The most represented patients were men (50.67%).  P. aeruginosa was isolated from the four settings and the prevalence was 10%. A large proportion of P.aeruginosa were biofilm producer with 30% being strong biofilm producer, 53.33% were weak biofilm producer and 16.67% were non-biofilm producers. Twenty percent of P. aeruginosa were highly hydrophobes while, 23.33% were moderately hydrophobes and 56.67 were low hydrophobes. The activities of most antibiotics were negatively correlated with biofilms and hydrophobicity. Isolates from lochia and wounds were biofilm producers and showed multidrug resistance while isolates from urine and pus was very hydrophobic.


Conclusion: These findings should serve as evidence base that biofilms and hydrophobicity are factors that contribute to antibiotic resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. This demonstrates the need to consider these virulence factors, as well as the nature of the sample or excipient, during patient treatment, especially during empirical antibiotic therapy.

Article Details

How to Cite
NAPA TCHUEDJI, Y. L. G., YAP BOUM II, Emilia ENJEMA LYONGA, Sylvain SADO, Abraham NKOUE, Martha MESEMBE, Carole SAKE, Rosanne NGOME, Michelle Sandrine DJUIDJE KAMGUIA, Hortense GONSU KAMGA, & François-Xavier ETOA. (2024). Contribution of biofilm and Cell Surface Hydrophobicity in the resistance of Pseudomonas aeruginosa from some Healthcare settings of Yaounde . International Journal of Medical Science and Clinical Research Studies, 4(10), 1837–1846. https://doi.org/10.47191/ijmscrs/v4-i10-20
Section
Articles

References

I. Senobar TSA, Stájer A, Barrak I, Ostorházi E, Szabó D, Gajdács M. 2021. Correlation between Biofilm-Formation and the Antibiotic Resistant Phenotype in Staphylococcus aureus Isolates: A Laboratory-Based Study in Hungary and a Review of the Literature. Infect Drug Resist.14,1155-1168.

II. World Health Organization. 2017. Global priority list of antibiotic-resistant bacteria to guide research, discovery, and development of new antibiotics. http://www.who.int/medicines/publications/WHO-PPL-Short_Summary_25Feb-ET_NM_WHO.pdf?ua=1. Accessed 2 November 2023.

III. Antimicrobial Resistance Collaborators. 2022. Global burden of bacterial antimicrobial resistance in 2019: a systematic analysis. Lancet . 399: 629–655.

IV. MINSANTE. 2018. Plan d’action national de lutte contre la résistance aux antimicrobiens. 2018-2020. 1-100

V. Sheyda A, Jacob T, Sara EC, Jennifer EC, Joanna B. Goldberg, Stephen PD. 2021. Cell surface hydrophobicity determines Pseudomonas aeruginosa aggregate assembly.1-29.

VI. Cochran, W G. 1977. Sampling techniques. New York. 3: 1-442.

VII. Akoachere, JTK, Palle, JN, Mbianda SE, Nkwelang G, Ndip NR. 2014. Risk factors for wound infection in health care facilities in Buea, Cameroon: Aerobic bacterial pathogens and antibiogram of isolates. Pan Afr. Med. J: 18-16.

VIII. Sagar S. 2022. Oxidase Test- Principle, Uses, Procedure, Types, Result Interpretation, Examples and Limitations. https://microbiologyinfo.com/oxidase-test-principle-uses-procedure-types-result-interpretation-examples-and-limitations/. Accessed 2, August 2023.

IX. Biomérieux. 2019. Identification system for non –fastidious, non-enteric Gram-negative rods. 1-4. Aavailable from: https://idoc.pub/documents/a-pi-20-ne-instructions-2nv812k6wylk

X. CA-SFM. 2020. Recommandations. Vol 1.0.pp.1-9.

XI. Andrabi ST., Bhat B, Gupta M, Bajaj BK. 2016. Phytase-Producing Potential and Other Functional Attributes of Lactic Acid Bacteria Isolates for Prospective Probiotic Applications. Probiotics and Antimicrobial Proteins, 8(3), 121–129.

XII. O'Toole GA et Kolter R. 1998. "Flagellar and twitching motility are necessary for Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilm development." Mol Microbiol. 30(2): 295-304.

XIII. Christensen GD, Simpson WA, Yonger JJ, Baddor LM, Barrett FF, Melton DM,

Beachey EH. 1985. Adherence of coagulase-negative staphylococci to plastic tissue culture

plates: a quantitative model for the adherence of staphylococci to medical devices. Journal of

Clinical Microbiology. 22: 996-1006.

XIV. Wang CY, Jerng JS, Cheng KY, Lee LN, Yu CJ, Hsueh PR et al. 2006. Pandrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa among hospitalised patients: clinical features, risk-factors and outcomes. 12(1), 63–68.

XV. Piano S, Singh V, Caraceni P, Maiwall R, Alessandria C, Fernandez J et al. 2018. International Club of Ascites Global Study Group. Epidemiology and Effects of Bacterial Infections in Patients With Cirrhosis Worldwide. Gastroenterology. 156(5):1368-1380

XVI. Madaha EL, Hortense KG, Rhoda NB. 2020. Occurrence of blaTEM and bla CTXM Genes and Biofilm-Forming Ability among Clinical Isolates of P. aeruginosa and Acinetobacter baumannii in Yaoundé, Cameroon Microorganisms; 8: 1-22.

XVII. Kamali E, Jamali A, Ardebili A, Ezadi F and Mohebbi A. 2020. Evaluation of antimicrobial resistance, biofilm forming potential and the presence of biofilm-related genes among clinical isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. BMC Res Notes 10;13(1):27. 1-6

XIII. Moradali MF, Rehm BHA. 2020. Bacterial biopolymers: From pathogenesis to advanced materials. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 18:195–210.

XIV. Rehm BHA. 2010. Bacterial polymers: Biosynthesis, modifications and applications. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 8:578–592.

XX. Lister PD, Wolter DJ, Hanson ND. 2009. Antibacterial-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Clinical impact and complex regulation of chromosomally encoded resistance mechanisms. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 22, 582–610.

XXI. Abidi SH, Sherwani SK, Siddiqui TR, Bashir A, Kazmi SU. 2013. Drug resistance profile and biofilm forming potential of Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolated from contact lenses in Karachi-Pakistan. BMC Ophthalmol.;13:57.1-6

XXII. Gibbons RJ, Etherden I. 1983. Comparative hydrophobicities of oral bacteria and their adherence to salivary pellicles. Infec Immun; 41(3):1190-96

Most read articles by the same author(s)