LGCmain
Indian Journal of Pathology and Microbiology
Home About us Instructions Submission Subscribe Advertise Contact e-Alerts Ahead Of Print Login 
Users Online: 294
Print this page  Email this page Bookmark this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 59  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 177-179

Comparison of four different methods for detection of biofilm formation by uropathogens


1 Department of Microbiology, Pandit Bhagwat Dayal Sharma Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Rohtak, Haryana, India
2 Department of Neuroanaesthesiology, All Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India

Correspondence Address:
Pragyan Swagatika Panda
Department of Microbiology, Pandit Bhagwat Dayal Sharma Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Rohtak, Haryana
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0377-4929.182013

Rights and Permissions

Context: Urinary tract infection (UTI) is one of the most common infectious diseases encountered in clinical practice. Emerging resistance of the uropathogens to the antimicrobial agents due to biofilm formation is a matter of concern while treating symptomatic UTI. However, studies comparing different methods for detection of biofilm by uropathogens are scarce. Aims: To compare four different methods for detection of biofilm formation by uropathogens. Settings and Design: Prospective observational study conducted in a tertiary care hospital. Materials and Methods: Totally 300 isolates from urinary samples were analyzed for biofilm formation by four methods, that is, tissue culture plate (TCP) method, tube method (TM), Congo Red Agar (CRA) method and modified CRA (MCRA) method. Statistical Analysis: Chi-square test was applied when two or more set of variables were compared. P < 0.05 considered as statistically significant. Considering TCP to be a gold standard method for our study we calculated other statistical parameters. Results: The rate of biofilm detection was 45.6%, 39.3% and 11% each by TCP, TM, CRA and MCRA methods, respectively. The difference between TCP and only CRA/MCRA was significant, but not that between TCP and TM. There was no difference in the rate of biofilm detection between CRA and MCRA in other isolates, but MCRA is superior to CRA for detection of the staphylococcal biofilm formation. Conclusions: TCP method is the ideal method for detection of bacterial biofilm formation by uropathogens. MCRA method is superior only to CRA for detection of staphylococcal biofilm formation.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed8702    
    Printed144    
    Emailed1    
    PDF Downloaded592    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 3    

Recommend this journal