Evidence mapPaperPMID 40410552Full record

ArticleNaunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology2025

Multidrug resistance, biofilm formation, and genetic determinants in diabetic foot infections from Uttar Pradesh, India: a clinical-microbiological insight from a prospective study.

Mohd Saleem, Mohd Shahid Khan, Arslan Neyaz, Irfan Ahmad, Malak Yahia Qattan, Nadeem Ahmad

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Mohd SaleemDepartment of Pathology, College of Medicine, University of Ha'il, Hail, Saudi Arabia.
Mohd Shahid KhanDepartment of Microbiology, Hind Institute of Medical Sciences, Mau, Ataria, Sitapur, Uttar Pradesh, 261303, India. shahid89research@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0001-0999-9346
Arslan NeyazDepartment of Community Medicine, Hind Institute of Medical Sciences, Mau, Ataria, Sitapur, 261303, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Irfan AhmadDepartment of Clinical Laboratory Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia.
Malak Yahia QattanDepartment of Health Sciences, College of Applied Studies and Community Service, King Saud University, KSA-4545, 11451, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Nadeem AhmadDepartment of Microbiology, Integral Institute of Medical Sciences and Research, Integral University, Dasauli, Lucknow, 226026, India.

Funding

the Deanship of Research and Graduate Studies, King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia Grant no. R.G.P.2/513/45
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This prospective cohort study systematically analyzed the demographic profile, clinical characteristics, spectrum of microorganisms, and antimicrobial resistance pattern in 248 patients with diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) over 2.7 years. Most patients were male (75.4%) and had a mean age of 56.1 years, and high comorbidity rates (81% neuropathy, 77% retinopathy, and 67.7% hypertension). A combined 439 bacterial isolates were obtained, with the dominance of Gram-negative pathogens, including Escherichia coli (16.6%) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (15.3%). Staphylococcus aureus was also the dominant Gram-positive pathogen (12.8%). Polymicrobial infections were found in 43.1% of cases, and 71% of strains were biofilm-producing. The prevalence of multidrug-resistant (MDR) was alarmingly high (67%), particularly among Escherichia coli (97.3%), Staphylococcus aureus (83.9%), and Proteus mirabilis (90.5%). MDR infections were associated with tobacco use, biofilm formation, polymicrobial infection, and clinical complications. In specific, seven bacterial types, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Staphylococcus aureus, Providencia rettgeri, Enterococcus faecalis, Enterobacter cloacae, Pseudomonas flourescens, and Staphylococcus epidermidis, as described, were statistically associated with amputation. Beta-lactams (ampicillin, piperacillin) showed 100% resistance. Cephalosporins (ceftazidime, ceftriaxone, cefotaxime, cefepime) had resistance rates ranging from 25 to 96%. Amoxicillin-clavulanic acid showed 30 to 92.3% resistance, while piperacillin-tazobactam ranged from 7.7 to 71.4% resistance. Out of 338 Gram-negative isolates, 105 (31.1%) were ESBL producers, and molecular characterization shows blaCTX-M as the most predominant, 40 (38.1%), followed by blaSHV 20 (19.0%), and blaTEM 7 (6.7%) isolates. Methicillin and vancomycin resistance were common among Gram-positive isolates, particularly Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) (51.8%) and Vancomycin-resistant Enterococci (VRE) (33.3%). Despite widespread resistance, antibacterial drugs such as colistin (100%), polymyxin B (100%), linezolid (100%), and vancomycin (100%) retained efficacy. These data emphasize the significant burden of MDR infections in DFUs and emphasize the urgent actions needed for aggressive antimicrobial stewardship, early infection control, and personalized treatment approaches to prevent amputation and enhance patient outcomes.

Indexed as

BiofilmsDiabetic FootDrug Resistance, Multiple, BacterialAdultAgedAnti-Bacterial AgentsFemaleGram-Negative BacteriaHumansIndiaMaleMicrobial Sensitivity TestsMiddle AgedProspective StudiesAnti-Bacterial AgentsAntimicrobial resistanceBiofilm formationDiabetic foot ulcerESBL genesMultidrug resistance

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.