Table 2.
Multiple antibiotic resistance profiles determined in isolates
| Resistance profile | Number of ESBL (+) isolates (%) (n:22) | Number of ESBL (-) isolates (%) (n:28) | Total (%) (n:50) |
|---|---|---|---|
| S+TE+C+COT | 4 (18.18) | 1 (3.57) | 5 (10) |
| S+TE+COT | 0 | 1 (3.57) | 1 (2) |
| S+EX+CIP+TE+C | 0 | 1 (3.57) | 1 (2) |
| GEN+S+EX+CIP+TE+C+COT | 1 (4.54) | 0 | 1 (2) |
| EX+CIP+TE+ETP+COT+PIT | 1 (4.54) | 0 | 1 (2) |
| TE+C+COT | 2 (9.09) | 1 (3.57) | 3 (6) |
| Total | 8 (36.36) | 4 (14.28) | 12 (24) |
S: Streptomycin, TE: Tetracycline, C: Chloramphenicol, COT: Trimethoprim-Sulfamethoxazole, EX: Enrofloxacin, CIP: Ciprofloxacin, GEN: Gentamicin, ETP: Ertapenem, and PIT: Piperacillin-Tazobactam
In the statistical analysis, ESBL positivity was found to be significantly related to G10 profiles (P=0.040). In addition, it was found that vaginal isolates (n=8) had G6 (n=2), G7 (n=4), G9 (n=1), and G10 (n=1) profiles (Fig. 2). Statistically significant relationship was not determined between genotype profile and isolation site of the strains (P>0.05).