International Journal of Microbiology

International Journal of Microbiology / 2020 / Article

Research Article | Open Access

Volume 2020 |Article ID 6512106 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/6512106

Akim Socohou, Haziz Sina, Cyriaque Degbey, Chimène Nanoukon, Kamirou Chabi-Sika, Hélène Ahouandjinou, Halfane Lehmane, Farid Baba-Moussa, Lamine Baba-Moussa, "Antibiotics Resistance and Biofilm Formation Capacity of Staphylococcus spp. Strains Isolated from Surfaces and Medicotechnical Materials", International Journal of Microbiology, vol. 2020, Article ID 6512106, 6 pages, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/6512106

Antibiotics Resistance and Biofilm Formation Capacity of Staphylococcus spp. Strains Isolated from Surfaces and Medicotechnical Materials

Academic Editor: Joseph Falkinham
Received19 Feb 2020
Revised25 May 2020
Accepted04 Jun 2020
Published27 Aug 2020

Abstract

Staphylococcus spp. is most often implicated in nosocomial infections. The objective of this study is to evaluate the susceptibility to antibiotics and the biofilm formation capacity of staphylococci species isolated from surfaces and medicotechnical materials at the university hospital center of Abomey-Calavi/Sô-Ava in Benin. Samples were collected according to ISO/DIS14698-1 standard from the surfaces and medicotechnical materials by the dry swab method. The isolation of Staphylococcus strains was performed on Chapman agar, and their identification was performed using microscopic and biochemical methods. The susceptibility of Staphylococcus isolates to antibiotics was evaluated by the disc diffusion method according to EUCAST and CLSI recommendations. The biofilm formation was qualitatively assessed using microplates. Of the 128 surfaces and medicotechnical material samples analyzed, 77% were contaminated with Staphylococcus spp. Thirteen species of Staphylococcus were isolated in different proportions but the pediatric department was the most contaminated (33%) by S. aureus. Resistance to antibiotics considerably varies according to the species of Staphylococcus. However, antibiotics such as chloramphenicol and vancomycin are the most effective on S. aureus, whereas coagulase-negative staphylococci developed less resistance to gentamycin and ciprofloxacin. The biofilm test reveals that 37% of our isolated strains were biofilm formers. Although regular monitoring of hospital hygiene is crucial, the optimal use of antibiotics is a cornerstone of reducing antimicrobial resistance.

1. Introduction

The hospital is a place where the risk of infection is very high. These hospital-acquired (nosocomial) infections are recognized as a real public health problem because of their frequency, socioeconomic cost, and severity. Those infections affect patients, their families, and all health professionals. The causes of nosocomial infections are multiple, linked both to care procedures and to behavioral practices. Several studies show that Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus are predominantly isolated from all nosocomial infections [1]. In a study conducted by Ahoyo et al. [2] in the pediatric unit of the Zou and Collines departmental hospital (Benin), 32% of nosocomial infection involving S. aureus was reported in the care environment.

In fact, staphylococci were identified at the dawn of the Pasteur era and have never ceased to give rise to research, as their importance is so great in pathology. They occupy a significant proportion among the bacteria responsible for serious infections. Moreover, they are observed in multiple clinical situations, both in community and nosocomial pathologies [3]. In addition, staphylococci are predominant pathogens of postoperative infections. Among these, coagulase-negative Staphylococcus are the main agents on materials [4]. Some Staphylococcus species can also survive on inanimate surfaces such as bedding, clothing, and door handles [5]. This general tendency to adhere to various surfaces is produced by a polysaccharide matrix called biofilm, and this factor confers significant resistance to antibiotics and to attacks by the immune system [6, 7]. In hospitals, the selection pressure exerted by antibiotics and antiseptics reinforces the emergence of the most resistant bacteria. Thus, hospital environment appears like multidrug-resistant bacteria reservoirs. This is combined with the many risk factors for cross-transmission of pathogenic germs and can explain their involvement in nosocomial infections [8]. Moreover, mortality linked to infections with multidrug-resistant bacteria remains very high worldwide [9]. Several cases of multidrug-resistant bacteria are reported in Benin [10] and in other sub-Saharan African countries [11].

The predominance of Staphylococcus spp. in hospitals indicates a noncompliance with hygiene rules [12, 13]. The present study was conducted for a better knowledge of pathogenic Staphylococcus strains for an effective therapeutic approach and a better use of antibiotics. Thus, our study aims at drawing up the resistance profile of Staphylococcus species isolated from the Abomey-Calavi/Sô-Ava university hospital center and determining their capacity to form bacterial biofilm.

2. Material and Methods

2.1. Sampling

The samples were collected in the university center hospital of Abomey-Calavi/Sô-Ava (Southern Benin) from January to June 2019 in 5 departments (Neonatology, Pediatrics, Maternity, Operating room, and Central sterilization) according to ISO/DIS14698-1 [14]. For the study, 128 samples were collected by the dry swab method from surfaces and medicotechnical materials such as beds, soils, carriages, baby vanity tables, weighs baby, mattresses, cupboard, and Caesarean boxes. For the sampling, after passing the swabs over defined areas, they were returned to their protective cases. The collected samples were transported using icebox containing coolers (∼8°C) and then 5 ml of Mueller Hinton broth was added to each case and then incubated at 37°C for 24 h. Three repetitions were done for each surface and equipment.

2.2. Isolation and Identification of Isolated Strains

The isolation of Staphylococcus bacteria was carried out on Chapman agar. In brief, after 24 hours of incubation, the cases having the cloudy appearance testifying to a bacterial growth were incubated at 37°C on Chapman agar for 24 hours [15]. The identification of Staphylococcus strains was carried out using microscopic and biochemical methods (Gram stain, DNase test, and catalase test) and API® Staph (bioMerieux, France).

2.3. Susceptibility of Strains to Antibiotics

The susceptibility of Staphylococcus strain isolated to 15 antibiotics was investigated by the disc diffusion method on the Mueller Hinton agar medium according to the EUCAST [16] and CLSI [17] recommendations. The bacterial suspension was standardized using the 0.5 McFarland control. Fifteen tested antibiotics were penicillin G (P 10 μg), vancomycin (VA 30 μg), fosfomycin (FOS 50 μg), tetracycline (OT 30 μg), amoxiclav (AC 30 μg), cefoxitin (FOX 30 μg), gentamycin (G 10 μg), (C 30 μg), cephalothin (KC 30 μg), kanamycin (K 30 μg), erythromycin (E 15 μg), ciprofloxacin (CF 5 μg), streptomycin (S 10 μg), trimethoprim (TMP 5 μg), chloramphenicol (C 30 μg), and ceftriaxone (CI 30 μg).

2.4. Bacterial Biofilm Formation Test

The bacterial capacity to form biofilm was determined using the method previously described by the Christensen et al. [18]. Therefore, we used in vitro microplate study models to assess qualitatively biofilm formation because of the occurrence of visible film. Thus, from an 18 h culture in Brain Heart Infusion (BHI) Broth medium, a 48-well microplate was inoculated with 10 μl of bacteria suspension to which 150 μl of BHI was added. The microplates were incubated for 24 hours at 37°C and wells were washed three times with 0.2 ml of sterile physiological water in order to eliminate the free bacteria. The biofilms formed by the adhesion of sessile organisms to the polystyrene support in each of the wells were stained with violet crystal (0.1%) for 10 min. The excess dye was then removed by thorough washing with sterile distilled water and the plates were left at room temperature for drying [19]. After air-drying, the occurrence of visible film lined the microplate walls, and the bottom of the walls indicates biofilm production.

2.5. Data Analysis

Data were recorded and analyzed with MS Excel 2013 Spreadsheet. The percentage of resistance was calculated for each antibiotic by dividing the frequency of resistant bacteria by the number of bacteria tested. The Graph Pad Prism 7.00 software was used for the graphs. The threshold of statistical significance was set at .

3. Results

3.1. Identification of Bacteria

Among the 128 samples collected in the study, 77% were contaminated with Staphylococcus spp., spread in different proportions, into 13 species, namely: S. aureus, S. capitis, S. cohnii ssp. cohnii, S. epidermidis, S. haemolyticus, S. hominis, S. lentus, S. lugdunensis, S. saprophyticus, S. schleiferi, S. sciuri, S. xylosus, and S. warneri. Thus, independent of the unit of sample collection, Staphylococcus aureus was the most predominant (43%) followed by S. xylosus (11%). S. saprophyticus and S. warneri (1%) were the least isolated (Figure 1).

The distribution of the major species is very variable depending on the sampling units. It thus appears that the pediatric unit is the most contaminated (33%) by the strains of S. aureus followed by maternity and neonatology (25%), and the central sterilization unit is the least contaminated (7%) (Figure 2).

3.2. Susceptibility to Antibiotics

The isolated strains were split into two categories for the assessment of susceptibility to antibiotics. S. aureus is the coagulase-positive staphylococci (CPS) isolated and the other 12 species (S. capitis, S. cohnii ssp. cohnii, S. epidermidis, S. haemolyticus, S. hominis, S. lentus, S. lugdunensis, S. saprophyticus, S. schleiferi, S. sciuri, S. xylosus, and S. warneri) are coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS). Thus, it is observed that all of the S. aureus strains are resistant to cephalothin followed by resistance level to fosfomycin (92.5%) and cefoxitin (87.5%). The lowest resistance of S. aureus was recorded with chloramphenicol (15%) and vancomycin (25%).

Considering the coagulase-negative staphylococci, there was recorded high resistance to fosfomycin (94%) and penicillin (87%). The lowest resistance in CNS was observed with gentamycin (17%) and ciprofloxacin (17%) (Table 1).


AntibioticsS. aureus resistance rate (%)CNS resistance rate (%)

Cefoxitin87.5066.00
Kanamycin80.0042.00
Erythromycin75.0054.00
Fosfomycin92.5094.00
Vancomycin25.0025.00
Cephalothin100.0081.00
Trimethoprim85.0064.00
Tetracycline47.5046.00
Penicillin G80.0087.00
Chloramphenicol15.0026.00
Streptomycin30.0021.00
Amoxiclav75.0034.00
Gentamycin52.5017.00
Ciprofloxacin45.0017.00
Ceftriaxone80.0058.00

3.3. Biofilm Research Test

The biofilm formation test reveals that 37% of our isolates were biofilm formers. When considering species, we observe that 100% of the species of S. lugdunensis and S. warneri isolated were biofilm-forming bacteria followed by S. epidermidis (60%). However, no biofilm formation was noticed with species such as S. cohnii ssp. cohnii, S. haemolyticus, and S. saprophyticus (Figure 3) isolated in our study.

4. Discussion

Among the thirteen identified staphylococci species, there was a predominance of Staphylococcus aureus (43%). A high proportion (∼45%) of Staphylococcus aureus from hospital environment samples has been reported in Benin [13] and Morocco [20]. However, in Mali, S. epidermidis was reported to be the predominant species in the hospitals [21]. The frequency and the rate of isolated species vary according to their sampling site. Thus, it can be mentioned that species exclusively from human origin (S. capitis, S. hominis, S. lugdunensis, and S. schleiferi), species of both human and animal origin (S. aureus, S. cohnii, S. haemolyticus, S. warneri, and S. xylosus), and species of animal origin (S. hyicus, S. lentus, and S. sciuri) were observed [21]. The presence of those species (animal and/or human) in the hospital environment is evidence of human contamination and suggests contact between patients and animals or between health personnel and animals in their living environment. S. aureus is the unique coagulase-positive strain isolated, and its pathogenicity is reported to be related to the expression of several virulence factors [22]. In addition, some CNS such as S. saprophyticus and S. epidermidis through their ability to adhere to the bladder epithelium are able to cause cystitis in young women, and S. lugdunensis is responsible for skin infections and infectious endocarditis [23].

The distribution of species according to the sampling units shows that S. aureus isolates are found in all the units. However, pediatrics unit was the most contaminated (33%) by S. aureus. This high presence in these various units is worrying when we know that the deficient immune status of patients represents a breeding ground for its pathogenic microorganisms to trigger an infection. In addition, 30% of the African strains of S. aureus isolated from all types of samples have been shown to produce the LPV toxin [24, 25].

In general, hospital bacteria are resistant to several classes of antibiotics. Therefore, beyond the ubiquitous nature of staphylococcal strains, we must add their exceptional ability to develop multidrug resistance to several antibiotics [26]. The S. aureus strain isolated in this study showed a high level of resistance to cephalothin followed by fosfomycin and cefoxitin. On the other hand, the relatively low resistance rate of S. aureus isolates was observed with chloramphenicol and vancomycin. This resistance to cephalothin recorded suggests that these strains have already been in contact with this generation of cephalosporin. In addition, this confirms the presence of methicillin-resistant S. aureus since the cephalothins are only active on sensitive S. aureus. Similarly, resistance rate to fosfomycin and cefoxitin on clinical strains was observed in Brazzaville [27]. Considering fosfomycin, our results are contrary to those obtained in Algeria on clinically isolated S. aureus where it was about 90% of sensitivity [28]. This difference observed between our results may be explained by the intensity of the contact between this antibiotic and the S. aureus strains in these two countries. The resistance rate to cefoxitin (87.5%) observed in our study is higher than the 43% obtained on S. aureus in the hospital environment at the public hospital center of Boufarik in Algeria [29]. These results suggest that 87.5% of S. aureus obtained in our study is resistant to methicillin (MRSA). Our recorded data are much higher than the rate of MRSA observed in French hospitals, which was from 10% to 16.5% in 2016 [30]. Nevertheless, S. aureus showed weak resistance to chloramphenicol (15%) and vancomycin (25%). Indeed, a low resistance rate for chloramphenicol (0.6%) had been mentioned on community-acquired S. aureus in Morocco [31].

The proportion of resistance to vancomycin is lower than the 63.63% obtained on clinical strains of S. aureus [27]. However, the efficacy of vancomycin has been demonstrated both on food [32] and clinically isolated S. aureus strains [29]. In addition, Daurel et al. [33] estimated that approximately 90% of MRSA is hospital-based and that vancomycin may be an alternative for resistance. Therefore, according to observed results, chloramphenicol and vancomycin could be alternative molecules in cases of hospital-acquired MRSA infections. CNS have also high proportions of resistance to fosfomycin and penicillin. Data recorded with fosfomycin are contrary to those published in Algeria [34]. This difference could be explained by a very moderate use of fosfomycin on staphylococcal strains in Algeria. Meanwhile, they reported about 60% resistance of CNS to penicillin. However, the CNS have shown low resistance to gentamycin and ciprofloxacin. This finding on the low rate of resistance to gentamycin and ciprofloxacin had been observed on clinical CNS isolates in Mali [21]. Given all these results, we believe that an improvement in antibiotic therapy must be taken seriously in these various services.

Many staphylococci have the capacity to produce biofilm, which makes it easier for them to adhere to medical equipment and surface. The biofilm formation test reveals that 37% of our isolates were biofilm formers. This rate is lower than the 89% obtained on staphylococcal strains isolated from medical implants in Algeria [35]. Considering species, it is observed that all S. lugdunensis and S. warneri isolated were formative of biofilm followed by S. epidermidis (60%). This proportion of biofilm formation by S. lugdunensis and S. warneri is higher than the result obtained by Ahouandjinou [36], which was 28% and 20%, respectively, for S. lugdunensis and S. warneri on food Staphylococcus spp. strains. This difference could be explained by the low representativeness of these isolates and the origin of collected samples. Our results on S. epidermidis corroborate those of Kara-Terki [37], who revealed that 53.5% of the strains of S. epidermidis isolated from urinary catheters were biofilm-forming. However, no biofilm formation was noticed with species such as S. cohnii ssp. cohnii, S. haemolyticus, and S. saprophyticus isolated in this study. We can say that isolated S. aureus and biofilm-forming CNS are dangerous germs since their virulence also resides in the capacity to produce an extracellular matrix and constitute a biofilm [38].

It should be remembered that in our study, the influence of biofilm formation on antibiotics resistance was not observed since some strains, although biofilm-forming, were found to be sensitive to certain antibiotics. This could be explained by the fact that we used planktonic colonies to carry out the susceptibility assay. This is why Fitzpatrick et al. [38] consider that antibiotic usually active on bacteria in the planktonic state often proves to be less effective on structures organized in biofilm. Therefore, the eradication of a bacterial biofilm represents a big clinical problem.

5. Conclusion

Among the thirteen staphylococcal species identified in the hospital environment, S. aureus was the only coagulase-positive staphylococci isolated. These isolates are of various origins, and this implies poor practice of hygienic rules. It is also observed that these identified Staphylococcus strains display variable resistance profiles to tested antibiotics. Antibiotics such as chloramphenicol and vancomycin are more effective on S. aureus. The coagulase-negative Staphylococcus strains developed less resistance to gentamycin and ciprofloxacin. The capacity of staphylococcal cells to form biofilm was high with S. lugdunensis, S. warneri, and S. epidermidis strains. Among the prevention strategies, the optimal use of antibiotics is the cornerstone of the reduction of antibiotic resistance. However, regular monitoring of hospital hygiene is crucial with the use of biodetergents suitable for combating the formation of bacterial biofilms. To end, an evaluation of toxin production by isolated species and a molecular characterization could better inform on their pathogenicity level.

Data Availability

The data used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. K. Amazian, J. Rossello, A. Castella et al., “Prevalence of nosocomial infections in 27 hospitals in the Mediterranean region,” Eastern Mediterranean Health Journal, vol. 16, no. 10, pp. 1070–1078, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  2. A.-T. Ahoyo, L. Baba-Moussa, M. Makoutode et al., “Incidence de Staphylococcus aureus résistant à la méticilline dans le service de néonatologie du centre hospitalier départemental du zou et des collines au Bénin,” Archives de Pédiatrie, vol. 13, no. 11, pp. 1391–1396, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  3. K. H. Zahlane, “Staphylocoque: état actuel de l’épidémiologie et de l’antibiorésistance au CHU de Rabat,” Maroc Médical, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 279–285, 2007. View at: Google Scholar
  4. B. Veber, F. Jegou, and D. Jusserand, Département d’Anesthésie-Réanimation, CHU, Charles Nicolle, 1, rue de germont, 76031 rouen cedex: Conférence d’Actualisation, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2001.
  5. L. Freeman-Cook and K. Freeman-Cook, Staphylococcus aureus Infections, Chelsea House Publishers, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2006.
  6. L. M. Cobb, J. C. Mychaleckyj, D. J. Wozniak, and Y. S. López-Boado, “Pseudomonas aeruginosa flagellin and alginate elicit very distinct gene expression patterns in airway epithelial cells: implications for cystic fibrosis disease,” The Journal of Immunology, vol. 173, no. 9, pp. 5659–5670, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  7. R. M. Donlan and J. W. Costerton, “Biofilms: survival mechanisms of clinically relevant microorganisms,” Clinical Microbiology Reviews, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 167–193, 2002. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  8. M. Halwani, M. Solaymani-Dodaran, H. Grundmann, C. Coupland, and R. Slack, “Cross-transmission of nosocomial pathogens in an adult intensive care unit: incidence and risk factors,” Journal of Hospital Infection, vol. 63, no. 1, pp. 39–46, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  9. Agence Régionale de Santé Corse, Dossier de Presse Antibioresistance, Agence Régionale de Santé Corse, Ajaccio, France, 2019, http://www.corse.ars.sante.fr.
  10. H. Sina, F. Baba Moussa, T. A. Ahoyo et al., “Antibiotic susceptibility and toxins production of Staphylococcus aureus isolated from clinical samples from Benin,” African Journal of Microbiology Research, vol. 5, no. 18, pp. 2797–2803, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  11. K. O. Akinyémi, O. Oladapo, C. E. Okwara, C. C. Ibe, and K. A. Fsure, “Screening of crude extract of six medecinal plants used in south-west Nigerian unorthodox medecine for antimethicillin resistant S. aureus activity,” BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, vol. 5, pp. 5-6, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  12. A. Socohou, H. Sina, C. C. Degbey et al., “Risk factors and microbiological control of soils, surfaces and medical-technical equipment at the abomey-calavi/so-ava university hospital center, Benin,” International Journal of Pathogen Research, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1–9, 2019. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  13. F. C. D. Afle, K. J. M. K. Quenum, S. Hessou, and R. C. Johnson, “État des lieux des infections associées aux soins dans deux hôpitaux publics du sud Benin (afrique de l’ouest): centre hospitalier universitaire de zone d’abomey- calavi/sô-ava et centre hospitalier de zone de cotonou 5,” Journal of Applied Biosciences, vol. 121, no. 1, pp. 12192–12201, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  14. International Organasation for Stadardization (ISO), Cleanrooms and Associated Collected Environnements-Biocontamination Control, International Organasation for Stadardization (ISO), Geneva, Switzerland, First edition, 2003.
  15. M. Cheesbrough, District Laboratory Practice in Tropical Countries: Part 2, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2004.
  16. Europeen Commitee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST), Recommandations, Europeen Commitee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST), Växjö, Sweden, 2018.
  17. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI), Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing, Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI), Wayne, PA, USA, 2013, https://www.facm.ucl.ac.be/intranet/CLSI/CLSI-M100S23-susceptibility-testing-2013-no-protection.pdf.
  18. G. D. Christensen, W. A. Simpson, A. L. Bisno, and E. H. Beachy, “Adherence of biofilm producing strains of Staphylococci epidermidis to smooth surfaces,” Infection and Immunity, vol. 37, pp. 318–326, 1982. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  19. S. Stepanovic, D. Vukovic, I. Dakic, B. S. Savic, and M. Vabic-Vlahovic, “A modified microtiter-plate test for quantification of staphylococcal biofilm formation,” Journal of Microbiological Methods, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 175–179, 2000. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  20. S. Madi and K. Djema, Isolement et Caractérisation des Bactéries Multirésistantes Impliquées Dans les Infections Nosocomiales et L’environnement Hospitalier au Niveau de L’hôpital de Lakhdaria, Université Akli Mohand Oulhadj Bouira, Bouira, Algeria, 2019.
  21. M. Fomba, “Rôle pathogène et sensibilité aux antibiotiques des acinetobacter et des staphylococcus à coagulase négative à l’hôpital du point g,” Université de Bamako, Bamako, Mali, 2006, Ph.D. thesis. View at: Google Scholar
  22. R. J. Gordon and F. D. Lowy, “Pathogenesis of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection,” Clinical Infectious Diseases, vol. 46, no. 5, pp. 350–359, 2008. View at: Google Scholar
  23. University of Bordeaux, Staphylococcus: Cours de Bactériologie Médecine: Staphylococcus à Coagulase Négative, University of Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France, 2019, http://www.microbes–édu.org/étudiant/Staph.html.
  24. L. Baba Moussa, A. Sanni, A. Y. Dagnra et al., “Approche épidémiologique de l’antibiorésistance et de la production de leucotoxines par les souches de Staphylococcus aureus isolées en afrique de l’ouest,” Médecine et Maladies Infectieuses, vol. 29, no. 11, pp. 689–696, 1999. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  25. N. Y. Zinzendorf, L. Baba-Moussa, T. Ouassa et al., “Production de leucotoxines et résistance à la méticilline chez des souches de Staphylococcus aureus isolées à Abidjan,” Journal of Science Pharmcology and Biology, vol. 14, no. 1, 2013. View at: Google Scholar
  26. H. K. Allen, J. Donato, H. H. Wang, K. A. Cloud-Hansen, J. Davies, and J. Handelsman, “Call of the wild: antibiotic resistance genes in natural environments,” Nature Reviews Microbiology, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 251–259, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  27. B. T. Ngoulou, G. Ahombo, E. Nguimbi, R. Ampa, and R. Moyen, “Caractérisation moléculaire et distribution des gènes codant la résistance aux macrolides, lincosamides et streptogramines b chez staphylococcus communautaires et cliniques à brazzaville Congo,” Afrique Science, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 352–363, 2019. View at: Google Scholar
  28. S. A. Rebiahi, “Caractérisation de souches de Staphylococcus aureus et étude de leur antibioresistance au niveau du centre hospitalo-universitaire de Tlemcen,” Université Tlemcen, Tlemcen, Algeria, 2012, Ph.D. thesis. View at: Google Scholar
  29. I. Belal and Z. Chergui, Isolement, Identification de Staphylococcus aureus Résistant à la Meticilline et Étude de Leur Profil de Résistance Aux Antibiotiques, Université de Blida, Blida, Algeria, 2019.
  30. N. Brieu and J. Delarbre, “Observatoire national de l’epidémiologie de la résistance bactérienne aux antibiotiques (ONERBA),” Tech. Rep., ONERBA, Paris, France, 2017, Rapport Technique. View at: Google Scholar
  31. M. Elazhari, K. Zerouali, D. Elhabchi et al., “Sensibilité aux antibiotiques des souches de Staphylococcus aureus communautaires à Casablanca (maroc),” Revue Tunisienne d’Infectiologie, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 134–140, 2010. View at: Google Scholar
  32. H. Sina, P. Attien, M. Wélé et al., “Sanitary risk factors and microbial contamination of grilled meats sold in cotonou, Benin,” Journal of Food Security, vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 175–182, 2019. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  33. C. Daurel and R. Leclercq, “L’antibiogramme de Staphylococcus aureus,” Revue Francophone des Laboratoires, vol. 2008, no. 407, pp. 81–90, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  34. H. S. Afissa, Etude de L’antibiorésistance des Souches de Staphylocoques Isolées à Partir des Dispositifs Médicaux à L’hôpital de Mohamed Boudiaf Ouargla, Université Kasdi Merbah Ouargla, Ouargla, Algeria, 2014.
  35. T. Bali and A. Djebbas, “Résistance aux antibiotiques des staphylocoques formant un biofilm sur les implants médicaux,” Université Kasdi Merbah Ouargla, Ouargla, Algeria, 2015. View at: Google Scholar
  36. S. H. S. Ahouandjinou, “Qualité microbiologique, antibioresistance des souches de staphylococcus spp et d’Escherichia coli isolées des carcasses bovines au Benin,” Université d’Abomey-Calavi, Cotonou, Benin, 2016, Ph.D. thesis. View at: Google Scholar
  37. I. Kara-Terki, “Caractérisation et évaluation de la formation de biofilm de souches de staphylocoques isolées de sondes urinaires chez des patients hospitalisés au CHU de Tlemcen,” Université Abou Bekr Blekaid Tlemcen, Tlemcen, Algeria, 2014, Ph.D. thesis. View at: Google Scholar
  38. F. Fitzpatrick, H. Humphreys, E. Smyth, C. A. Kennedy, and J. P. O’Gara, “Environmental regulation of biofilm formation in intensive care unit isolates of Staphylococcus epidermidis,” Journal of Hospital Infection, vol. 52, no. 3, pp. 212–218, 2002. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright © 2020 Akim Socohou et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


More related articles

 PDF Download Citation Citation
 Download other formatsMore
 Order printed copiesOrder
Views835
Downloads395
Citations

Related articles

Article of the Year Award: Outstanding research contributions of 2020, as selected by our Chief Editors. Read the winning articles.