新疆塔城地区不同来源大肠杆菌的耐药性调查

Survey of Antibiotic Resistance of E. coli from Different Sources in Tacheng Region in Xingjiang

掌握新疆塔城地区不同来源大肠杆菌对临床常用抗菌药物的耐药情况,可以为今后塔城地区建立细菌耐药数据库提供信息。采集新疆塔城地区某养殖场饮用水样(12份)、饲料样(49份)、牛粪样(56份)和养殖户家羊粪样(20份),分离大肠杆菌。采用琼脂稀释法对分离的大肠杆菌进行耐药性检测,通过卡方检验比较不同来源大肠杆菌耐药性的差异。结果表明:饮用水源菌对恩诺沙星、环丙沙星、阿莫西林/克拉维酸和氨苄西林耐药率达100%;饲料源菌对阿莫西林/克拉维酸和氨苄西林的耐药率分别为61.2%和51.0%;牛源菌对阿莫西林/克拉维酸和环丙沙星的耐药率均为14.3%;羊源菌对阿莫西林/克拉维酸和环丙沙星的耐药率分别为40.0%和35.0%。饮水源大肠杆菌对恩诺沙星、环丙沙星、阿莫西林/克拉维酸和氨苄西林的耐药率显著高于牛源菌、羊源菌和饲料源菌(P<0.05)。此外,不同来源大肠杆菌对头孢噻呋、阿米卡星、庆大霉素、安普霉素和氟苯尼考均敏感。多药耐药结果显示:饲料源菌以0耐(38.8%)和4耐(38.8%)为主;牛源菌以0耐(78.6%)为主;羊源菌以0耐(50.0%)为主;饮水源菌以4耐(100%)为主。上述结果表明不同来源大肠杆菌对被检抗菌药物的耐药情况差异显著,共性之处为不同来源大肠杆菌对被检药物的中介率均较高,暗示如不改变用药方案,近期耐药菌株数有迅速增长的风险。

In order to master the status of drug-resistance of E. coli from different sources and provide information for future establishing database of bacterial resistance in Tacheng Region, this study collected samples from farm and raising-households, including samples of drinking water （ 12）, feed （49）, bovine feces （56） and ovine feces （20）, and isolated E. coli from samples. The resistance of isolated E. coli to clinical antimicrobial drugs was detected by agar dilution method, and the differences in resistance to E. coli from different sources were compared by chi square test. The results showed that resistance rate of E. coli from drinking water to enrofloxacin, ciprofloxacin, amoxicillin/ clavulanic acid and ampicillin all reached 100%. Resistance rate of E. coli from feed to amoxicillin/clavulanic acid and ampicillin were 61.2% and 51.0%, respectively. Resistance rate of E. coli from bovine feces to amoxicillin/ clavulanic acid and ciprofloxacin was 14.3%. Resistance rate of E. coli from ovine feces to amoxicillin/clavulanic acid and ciprofloxacin were 40.0% and 35.0%, respectively. Resistance rate of E. coli from drinking water was significantly higher than that from bovine feces, ovine feces and feed to enrofloxacin, ciprofloxacin, amoxicillin/ clavulanic acid and ampicillin （P〈0.05）. 0 resistant and g resistant E. coli strains from feed accounted for 38.8%, 0 resistant E. coli strains from bovine feces and ovine feces accounted for 78.6% and 50.5%, respectively, g resistant E. coli strains from drinking water accounted for 100%. The above results indicated there were significant differences in resistance of E. coli from different sources to detected antibiotics, and the commonality was higher intermediate rate between E. coli from different sources to detected antimicrobial drugs, which suggested that there were risks of rapidly growing number of resistant E. coli, if not changing the medication regimen.