Article in HTML

Author(s): Anushri Keshri1, Varaprasad Kolla*2

Email(s): 1Anug7797@gmail.com, 2vkolla@rpr.amity.edu

Address:

    1Amity Institute of Biotechnology, Amity University Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, 493225, India
    2Amity Institute of Biotechnology, Amity University Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, 493225, India
    *Corresponding Author Email- vkolla@rpr.amity.edu

Published In:   Volume - 6,      Issue - 2,     Year - 2024


Cite this article:
Anushri Keshri, Varaprasad Kolla (2024) Comparative antibiotic susceptibility profiling of S. haemolyticus recovered from frequency hand-touched surfaces of hospital settings and urban built environments of central India. NewBioWorld A Journal of Alumni Association of Biotechnology, 6(2):1-7.

  View PDF

Please allow Pop-Up for this website to view PDF file.



 NewBioWorld A Journal of Alumni Association of Biotechnology (2024) 6(2):1-7 

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Comparative antibiotic susceptibility profiling of S. haemolyticus recovered from frequency hand-touched surfaces of hospital settings and urban built environments of central India

Anushri Keshri, Varaprasad Kolla*

Amity Institute of Biotechnology, Amity University Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, 493225, India.

Authors Email: Anug7797@gmail.com; vkolla@rpr.amity.edu

*Corresponding Author Email- vkolla@rpr.amity.edu

ARTICLE INFORMATION

 

ABSTRACT

Article history:

Received

14 October 2024

Received in revised form

10 December 2024

Accepted

15 December 2024

Keywords:

Multidrug resistance; Antibiotic susceptibility; CoNS;

S. haemolyticus; Surveillance programme

 

Staphylococcus haemolyticus (S. haemolyticus), a significant species among coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS), has emerged as a pathogenic bacterium with increasing multidrug resistance, posing challenges to its treatment. Notably, this resistance is not limited to clinical settings but extends to non-clinical environments, such as urban built environments (UBEs), which are becoming reservoirs for antibiotic-resistant bacteria. This study aimed to investigate the presence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria on frequently hand-touched surfaces in UBEs and hospital settings. A total of 200 isolates were collected from various sampled areas, cultured on Mannitol Salt Agar (MSA), and examined for staphylococcal characteristics. All isolates were confirmed as Gram-positive, catalase-positive, and exhibited both positive and negative coagulase responses. Antibiotic susceptibility testing was performed using 12 antibiotics, beginning with ampicillin and methicillin. Among the isolates, 84 exhibited antibiotic resistance, with 51 originating from UBEs and 33 from hospital settings. Further identification using the VITEK 2 system confirmed 28 isolates as S. haemolyticus, of which 16 were from UBEs and 12 were from hospital settings. Notably, multidrug resistance was more prevalent in hospital isolates compared to those from UBEs. The findings provide valuable insights into the epidemiology of S. haemolyticus and underscore the critical need for comprehensive measures to address the spread of antibiotic resistance. These measures should focus on stringent infection control, monitoring resistance patterns, and promoting prudent antibiotic use in both clinical and non-clinical settings.

 


Introduction

DOI: 10.52228/NBW-JAAB.2024-6-2-1

A coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) species has emerged as an opportunistic pathogen, primarily associated with nosocomial infections (Argemi X et al 2019). Staphylococcus haemolyticus (S. haemolyticus) accounts for 10–20% of clinical CoNS infections (Renaud F et al. 1991) and is the second-highest species of CoNS in frequency and importance among isolates from clinical infections after S. epidermidis (Zczuka E et al. 2015). The species was known for its ability to colonize human skin and mucosa, it can act as a reservoir for antimicrobial resistance genes, posing significant challenges to public health (Eltwisy HO et al.). This is particularly concerning in healthcare settings, where antibiotic use is high, creating selective pressure that fosters the emergence of multidrug-resistant strains, including methicillin-resistant S. haemolyticus (MRSH) (HAYATI Z 2019). Frequently hand-touched surfaces, such as door handles, chairs, and washbasin taps, serve as critical fomite reservoirs for these pathogens, enabling their transmission and persistence within hospitals (Keshri A et al. 2024). Beyond healthcare settings, urban built environments (UBEs) characterized by high human traffic and limited hygiene infrastructure also present potential hotspots for the transmission of resistant bacteria (Cave R et al. 2019).

The study of S. haemolyticus is crucial due to its increasing role in human infections and its remarkable ability to acquire resistance to multiple antibiotics. Although traditionally S. haemolyticus is considered less virulent than Staphylococcus aureus, it is associated with severe conditions, including bacteremia, endocarditis, and infections in implanted medical devices (Eltwisy HO et al.). Its pathogenicity is often linked to its capacity to form biofilms, which enhance its resistance to antibiotics and immune system clearance, making treatment challenging (Fredheim EG et al. 2009). Additionally, its genetic plasticity allows for the horizontal transfer of resistance genes, posing a risk of amplifying resistance across bacterial populations (Sharma 2020). The growing prevalence of multidrug-resistant S. haemolyticus highlights the urgent need for studies that address its epidemiology and resistance mechanisms, particularly in regions like India, where antibiotic misuse is widespread (da Costa PM et al. 2013).

Antibiotic resistance in India has become an escalating public health concern, driven by factors such as over-the-counter availability of antibiotics, inadequate infection control practices, and widespread misuse (Laxminarayan R et al. 2016). While substantial research has focused on hospital-acquired pathogens, there is a paucity of data on the antibiotic resistance profiles of pathogens isolated from non-hospital settings like educational environments (Kumari H et al. 2020). A comparative analysis of S. haemolyticus isolates from these distinct environments could provide insights into the ecological niches of this pathogen and the potential for inter-environmental transmission of resistant strains.

This study aims to investigate and compare the antibiotic susceptibility patterns of S. haemolyticus recovered from frequently hand-touched surfaces in hospital and UBE environments in central India. By identifying resistance trends and potential reservoirs of multidrug-resistant S. haemolyticus, the findings could inform targeted interventions to control the spread of resistant pathogens in both healthcare and community settings.

Materials and Methods

Sampling from frequently hand-touched surfaces of UBEs and hospital settings

Samples were collected from frequently hand-touched surfaces at various public places in UBEs and various hospital settings in Vidarbha, Maharashtra. A total of 200 isolates were tested, 100 from each environment (urban and hospital). The sampling was carried out in 0.9% sterile saline along with a swab, which was used for the sampling and kept in microcentrifuge tubes. After sampling, the bottles are kept in a cool condition and the samples are transferred to the laboratory in 2 hours.

Isolation of staphylococci species

To isolate staphylococci species from the sampled environment, a selective medium of mannitol salt agar (MSA – MH118-500G) has been used. The contaminated swab was used to inoculate the sterile media via the spread plate technique and incubated at 37 ° C for 24-48 hours. The isolated colonies were further maintained on an MSA plate under the same conditions.

Screening of staphylococci species

The colonies were screened for the potential staphylococci characteristics, including performing the conventional method such as gram staining, catalase, and coagulase tests, and the identification of the selected isolates at the species level using the VITEK 2 (BioMerieux) (Pincus DH et al. 2010).

Antibiotic susceptibility testing

Initially, ampicillin (10 µg) and methicillin (10 µg) antibiotics were checked for resistance and only those strains which are positive for the resistance were taken forward to investigate other antibiotics such as oxacillin (1 µg), gentamicin (10 µg), amoxicillin (10 µg), mupirocin (20 µg), erythromycin (15 µg), cefoxitin (30 µg), fusidic acid (10 µg), cefepime (30 µg), penicillin G (1 unit) and piperacillin (100 µg) (HI media, India). Antibiotic sensitivity test carried out on Muller Hinton Agar (MHA – M173-500G). A bacterial load of 0.5 McFarland standard was made with 24 hrs old culture maintained on nutrient broth. The lawn was prepared, and further antibiotic discs were placed on MHA plates and incubated for 24 hrs at 37ºC. After incubation, the growth of inhibition for antibiotic resistance was noted with the standard scale of the Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI 2018) Table 1.

Statistical analysis

In this study, the per-drug sensitivity of UBEs and hospital-based CoNS were statistically analyzed using an unpaired T-test with P<0.05 to determine significance via GraphPad Prism software.


Table 1: Antibiotic susceptibility profiling of S. haemolyticus recovered from frequently touched surfaces of UBE and hospital settings and their zone of inhibition in mm.

Isolates

AMP

MET

OXA

AMX

FOX

FEN

FUA

MUP

GEN

ERM

PEN

PIP

Zone of inhibition (mm)

Hospital settings

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

H6

33

(S)

0

(R)

40 (S)

40  (S)

40 (S)

40 (S)

40 (S)

40  (S)

40 (S)

40 (S)

40 (S)

40 (S)

H22

14

(R)

0

(R)

40 (S)

40  (S)

40 (S)

40 (S)

40 (S)

40  (S)

18 (S)

14 (S)

35 (S)

0 (R)

H29

17

(R)

13 (R)

11 (R)

28 (R)

35 (S)

38 (S)

35 (S)

38  (S)

33 (S)

18 (S)

24 (R)

14 (R)

H42

22

(R)

10 (R)

15 (R)

24 (R)

28 (S)

21 (R)

40 (S)

38  (S)

35 (S)

17 (S)

14 (R)

40 (S)

H52

17

(R)

12 (R)

12 (R)

16 (R)

21 (R)

16 (R)

37 (S)

40  (S)

36 (S)

39 (S)

40 (S)

40 (S)

H62

17

(R)

12 (R)

12 (R)

18 (R)

28 (S)

26 (S)

39 (S)

38  (S)

20 (S)

18 (S)

34 (S)

33 (S)

H67

13

(R)

0

(R)

16 (R)

10 (R)

18 (R)

32 (S)

29 (S)

39  (S)

24 (S)

40 (S)

19 (R)

26 (S)

H72

29

(S)

16 (R)

22 (S)

15 (R)

31 (S)

27 (S)

36 (S)

16 (R)

24 (S)

17 (S)

32 (S)

24 (S)

H76

21

(R)

13 (R)

14 (R)

12 (R)

10 (R)

28 (S)

32 (S)

40  (S)

20 (S)

38 (S)

38 (S)

27 (S)

H81

40 (S)

15 (R)

12 (R)

20 (R)

20 (R)

19 (R)

28 (S)

37  (S)

33 (S)

28 (S)

20 (R)

21 (R)

H92

21

(R)

13 (R)

17 (R)

22 (R)

17 (R)

35 (S)

27 (S)

33  (S)

25 (S)

22 (S)

16 (R)

29 (S)

H97

12

(R)

12 (R)

38 (S)

38  (S)

40 (S)

38 (S)

40 (S)

35  (S)

26 (S)

23 (S)

40 (S)

40 (S)

UBE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

P7

10

(R)

10 (R)

40 (S)

40  (S)

40 (S)

40 (S)

40 (S)

40  (S)

18 (S)

19 (S)

32 (S)

23 (S)

P9

0

(R)

S

11 (R)

22 (R)

40 (S)

40 (S)

21 (R)

33  (S)

40 (S)

40 (S)

13 (R)

0 (R)

P14

22

(R)

0

(R)

17 (R)

40  (S)

40 (S)

40 (S)

40 (S)

40  (S)

40 (S)

40 (S)

38 (S)

28 (S)

P23

16

(R)

15 (R)

0

(R)

S

40 (S)

40 (S)

11 (R)

26 (R)

40 (S)

40 (S)

40 (S)

40 (S)

P34

13

(R)

16 (R)

36 (S)

S

18 (R)

14 (R)

30 (S)

23 (R)

11 (R)

11 (R)

40 (S)

40 (S)

P37

23

(R)

15 (R)

21 (S)

31  (S)

27 (S)

27 (S)

15 (R)

15 (R)

33 (S)

31 (S)

40 (S)

40 (S)

P48

23

(R)

19 (S)

22 (S)

32  (S)

38 (S)

31 (S)

23 (R)

39  (S)

16 (S)

21 (S)

39 (S)

22 (R)

P52

38

(S)

0

(R)

38 (S)

S

21 (R)

12 (R)

25 (S)

22 (R)

0

(R)

10 (R)

14 (R)

16 (R)

P56

21

(R)

13 (R)

16 (R)

36  (S)

26 (S)

39 (S)

30 (S)

34  (S)

30 (S)

19 (S)

32 (S)

38 (S)

P59

13

(R)

27 (S)

39 (S)

34  (S)

36 (S)

34 (S)

16 (R)

23 (R)

40 (S)

40 (S)

16 (R)

16 (R)

P64

13

(R)

29 (S)

24 (S)

37  (S)

37 (S)

32 (S)

12 (R)

24 (R)

20 (S)

18 (S)

29 (S)

28 (S)

P71

26

(R)

13 (R)

40 (S)

34  (S)

40 (S)

40 (S)

32 (S)

34  (S)

31 (S)

26 (S)

17 (R)

38 (S)

P77

21

(R)

0

(R)

22 (S)

37  (S)

38 (S)

39 (S)

24 (R)

33  (S)

24 (S)

34 (S)

40 (S)

39 (S)

P86

17

(R)

12 (R)

0   (R)

S

31 (S)

37 (S)

10 (R)

17 (R)

35 (S)

36 (S)

40 (S)

26 (S)

P88

18

(R)

29 (S)

40 (S)

35  (S)

29 (S)

38 (S)

18 (R)

23 (R)

21 (S)

16 (S)

29 (S)

36 (S)

P98

15

(R)

28 (S)

40 (S)

35  (S)

32 (S)

29 (S)

32 (S)

38  (S)

21 (S)

22 (S)

40 (S)

23 (S)

S- Sensitive, R- Resistant, I- Intermediate. AMP (Ampicillin):- S – >29, R – <28, MET (Methicillin):- S – >18, R – <17, OXA (Oxacillin):- S – >18, R– <17, AMX (Amoxicillin):- S – >28, R – <28, FOX (Cefoxitin):- S – >25, R – < 25, FEN (Cefepime):- S – >24, R – <24, FUA (Fusidic acid):- S – >24, R– <24, MUP (Mupirocin):- S – >37, R – <31, GEN (Gentamicin):- S – >15, R – <12, ERN (Erythromycin):- S – >23, R – <13, PEN (Penicillin G):- S – >29, R – <28, PIP (Piperacillin):- S – >22, R – < 22


Results and Discussion

Surveying staphylococci species in urban built environments and hospital settings

Staphylococci colonies were grown on Mannitol Salt Agar (MSA) plates. Microbial loads varied significantly across locations. In UBE bus stops had an average colony count of 36 (range: 0-153), ATMs averaged 29 colonies (range: 3-58), while cafes showed a lower mean of 6.8 colonies (range: 0-28). Gardens and automobiles displayed typical counts of 13 and 54 colonies, respectively. In hospitals, washbasins had an average of 8.2 colonies (range: 0-23), lifts averaged 2 colonies (range: 0-8), and wheelchairs, doors, and tables had mean counts of 48, 86, and 49, respectively, reflecting substantial variability (Figure a). Circular colonies with yellow and pink hues on MSA agar indicated the presence of S. aureus and coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) species, which are gram-positive, catalase-positive, and exhibit variable coagulase responses (Figure b).

Screening of staphylococci species

All the colonies grown in MSA are gram-positive and catalase-positive and exhibit variable coagulase responses (both positive and negative).

Antimicrobial susceptibility analysis

Antibiotic-resistant staphylococci isolates from urban and hospital contexts demonstrated considerable disparities in resistance patterns. In UBEs and hospital settings, 51% and 33% were shown antibiotic-resistant staphylococci respectively. This represented a significant 18% difference between both environments, demonstrating that antibiotic resistance is more prevalent in metropolitan constructed environments (Figure c).


Figure a: No. of colonies recovered from various frequently touched surfaces of (a)UBEs (b) Hospital settings.

 

 

Figure b: Results of Gram stain, catalase and coagulase tests.

Figure c: Antibiotic susceptibility test of isolates recovered from different directions of: (A) urban built environments and (B) hospital settings towards various antibiotics used in this study.


Species-level identification of recovered isolates

Species-level identification via VITEK 2 confirms out of 84 antibiotic-resistant staphylococci 28 (33.33%) are identified as S. haemolyticus of which 16 belong to UBE and 12 from the hospital as it exhibits positivity for ARGININE DIHYDROLASE 1 (ADH1) and N-ACETYL-D-GLUCOSAMINE (NAG).

Comparative analysis of antibiotic-resistant S.  haemolyticus species in urban and hospital settings

In a comparison of UBEs and hospital settings, 57.14% and 42.85% of S. haemolyticus were detected respectively differing by 14.29%.  We also examined the antibiotic resistance trends of S. haemolyticus species in both urban and hospital settings, demonstrating significant heterogeneity among antibiotics. S. haemolyticus exhibited a resistance rate of 93.8% to ampicillin in UBEs and 75.0% in hospital settings. The recorded resistance to methicillin was 62.5% in UBEs and 100% in hospital settings. Resistance to oxacillin was found to be 31.3% in UBEs and 75% in hospital settings. For amoxicillin, the resistance rates were 6.3% in UBEs and 75% in hospital settings. Resistance to cefoxitin was 12.5% in UBEs and 41.7% in hospital settings. Cefepime showed a resistance rate of 12.5% in UBEs and 25% in hospital settings. Additionally, resistance to fusidic acid was recorded at 56.3% in UBEs and 0% in hospital settings. Mupirocin resistance was reported at 50% in UBEs and 16.7% in hospital settings. Gentamicin resistance was 18.8% in UBEs and 0% in hospital settings, while erythromycin resistance was also recorded at 18.8% in UBEs and 0% in hospital settings. For penicillin G, the resistance rates were 18.8% in UBEs and 33.3% in hospital settings. Resistance to piperacillin was found to be 25% in both environments.

Comparative multi-drug resistant profiling of S. haemolyticus species in urban and hospital settings

Multi-drug resistant profiling indicated that 91.66% of strains in hospital settings are MDR, while 81.25% of strains from UBEs are MDR. Therefore, the prevalence of MDR is higher in hospitals than in UBEs (Figure d).