• P-ISSN 2394-9481 E-ISSN 2394-949X
  • Before December 2023, article status/review can be accessed using old submissions tab

Journal of Medical Sciences and Health

Journal of Medical Sciences and Health

Year: 2025, Volume: 11, Issue: 2, Pages: 203-209

Original Article

The Emerging Trends or Exploration of the Existing: The Spectrum of Non-Enterobacterales Highlighting an Emerging Therapeutic Concern

Received Date:28 July 2025, Accepted Date:01 March 2025, Published Date:05 September 2025

Abstract

Abstract

Background: The Non-fermenting Gram-negative bacilli are being increasingly reported. Few of them have emerged as a major cause of healthcare associated infections. They often pose a great therapeutic concern because of their multidrug resistant nature. The rare and emerging pathogens in this category which are intrinsically resistant to important antimicrobials need to be reliably identified to prevent therapy failure. This study was carried out to observe the species distribution profile and antimicrobial susceptibility pattern of these bacteria. Material and Methods: The clinical specimens collected from the patients were subjected to aerobic culture on appropriate culture media. The isolated colonies on culture media were presumptively identified by conventional methods. The species level identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing was done by VITEK 2 compact automated system. Results: Among all non-fermenting Gram-negative bacilli, Acinetobacter baumannii was predominantly isolated comprising 42.22% followed by Pseudomonas aeruginosa (39.01%) and Burkholderia cepacia (5.80%). The majority of the isolates were isolated from endotracheal aspirate (26.79%), followed by pus (23.58%) and blood (17.53%). Acinetobacter species and Pseudomonas species were having good susceptibility against colistin. The rare and unusual pathogens like Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, Brevundimonas diminuta and Elizabethkingia meningoseptica were also reported highlighting the importance of automated methods of identification. Conclusion: The automated or molecular methods are important for reliable characterization of spectrum of pathogens as infrequent isolates are usually misidentified by conventional methods leading to treatment failure further added by intrinsic resistance among non-enterobacterales. The species distribution profile and susceptibility data can help clinicians to select appropriate antimicrobials for treatment.

Keywords

Non-enterobacterales, Non fermenting Gram negative bacilli, Healthcare-associated infections, VITEK 2

Introduction

The non-enterobacterales bacteria are non-fermenting Gram-negative bacilli (NFGNB). They are taxonomically diverse group of aerobic and non–spore forming bacilli. They neither use carbohydrates as a source of energy nor degrade them through metabolic pathways other than fermentation. 1 They were considered to be contaminants in the past but have now emerged as significant healthcare-associated pathogens, especially in immunocompromised hosts. 2 Acinetobacter baumannii and Pseudomonas aeruginosa are the most commonly isolated NFGNB having a tendency to colonize various surfaces in healthcare settings which is crucial in their emergence as important nosocomial pathogens. 3 These pathogens may pose a serious problem by causing infections associated with indwelling medical devices like urinary catheter, humidifier and ventilator and have been implicated in a variety of life-threatening infections such as septicaemia, meningitis, bacteraemia, ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP), urinary tract infections (UTI), surgical site infections (SSI), wound infections, osteomyelitis, and meningitis. 45 These non-enterobacterales bacteria exhibit resistant against many antimicrobials and have been documented to produce extended spectrum β-lactamases (ESBL) and metallo-β-lactamases (MBL). 6 The multidrug resistance (MDR) exhibited by these pathogens pose a major clinical problem in treating the infections caused by them. The conventional methods of identification are insufficient to identify these rare species. The misidentification is a common concern with conventional methods of identification leading to treatment failure due to intrinsic resistance exhibited by these bacterial species. The reliable species distribution trends of organisms and local antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of these emerging bacteria can help in selecting appropriate antimicrobial for effective empirical antimicrobial therapy and better outcomes. 7 This study may also provide a baseline information to formulate hospital antibiotic policy and also to prevent the spread of multidrug resistant strains within the hospital or in the community.

Materials and Methods

This cross-sectional hospital based observational study was conducted in the Department of Microbiology, Subharti Medical College, Swami Vivekanand Subharti University, Meerut for a period of one year, from May 2022 to April 2023. This study was approved by institutional ethics committee of Swami Vivekanand Subharti University (Medical), Meerut with reference number SMC/UECM/2022/400/202 dated 01/04/2022. The various clinical samples were collected by the trained personnel following standard precautions and aseptic procedures as per sample collection guidelines.

Sample processing

The clinical specimens collected from the patients were processed as per standard bacteriological techniques. 1 The clinical samples other than blood and urine were inoculated on blood agar, chocolate agar and MacConkey agar and incubated aerobically at 37°C for 24 to 48 hours. The urine samples were inoculated on cystine lactose electrolyte deficient (CLED) agar and incubated aerobically at 37°C for 24 hours. The blood culture was done by BacT/ ALERT 3D automated blood culture system (bioMerieux, France) using appropriate blood culture bottles for adults and paediatric age groups. The broth from positive flagged blood culture bottles was sub-cultured on blood agar, chocolate agar and MacConkey agar and incubated aerobically at 37°C for 24 to 48 hours. The isolates recovered from culture were provisionally identified by colony characteristic, morphology on Gram staining, motility, pigment production, catalase test and oxidase tests. The final species level identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) was done by VITEK 2 compact automated system (bioMerieux, France) using GN test card and AST-N406 card respectively.

Results

A total of 11897 samples were collected from the patients suspected of various clinical infections during the study period, out of which 5250 (44.12%) samples were culture positive. The bacterial isolates from all 5250 culture positive samples, 810 isolates were found NFGNB. The rate of isolation of NFGNB in our hospital was 15.43%. The NFGNB were isolated predominantly from indoor patients (73.08%) with male predominance (67.28%). The majority of the isolates were recovered from the patients belonging to the age group of 41-60 years (33.33%). The Acinetobacter baumannii was predominant bacterial isolate among NFGNB (42.22%) followed by Pseudomonas aeruginosa (39.01%). The species distribution of all NFGNB isolates is shown in Figure 1. The species level distribution of these NFGNB was not statistically significant at p-value of >0.05.

https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/typeset-prod-media-server/280b062e-920b-47f1-bd35-2759fc40f31aimage1.png
Figure 1: Spectrum of NFGNB isolated from clinical samples (n= 810); (p-value >0.05)

 

Table 1: Sample wise distribution of NFGNB (n=810); (p-value >0.05)

S. No.

Organisms

ET aspirate

Pus

Blood

Sputum

Urine

BAL fluid

Body fluids

CSF

Corneal scraping

1.

Acinetobacter baumannii (n= 342)

137

54

65

32

21

20

9

4

0

2.

Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n= 316)

62

116

16

51

44

20

5

0

2

3.

Burkholderia cepacia (n= 47)

3

5

26

4

7

0

2

0

0

4.

Acinetobacter lwoffii (n= 19)

1

2

7

3

5

0

0

1

0

5.

Achromobacter xylosoxidans (n= 16)

2

0

12

2

0

0

0

0

0

6.

Stenotrophomonas maltophilia (n= 15)

5

6

2

0

0

2

0

0

0

7.

Sphingomonas paucimobilis (n= 15)

0

2

7

3

3

0

0

0

0

8.

Pseudomonas fluorescens (n= 8)

2

1

1

1

2

0

0

0

1

9.

Pseudomonas luteola (n= 8)

3

1

0

2

2

0

0

0

0

10.

Pseudomonas putida (n= 8)

1

3

1

0

1

2

0

0

0

11.

Acinetobacter junii (n= 4)

0

0

0

0

2

0

2

0

0

12.

Pseudomonas stutzeri (n= 4)

0

0

2

1

0

1

0

0

0

13.

Pseudomonas oleovorans (n= 3)

0

1

0

0

1

1

0

0

0

14.

Achromobacter denitrificans (n= 2)

0

0

2

0

0

0

0

0

0

15.

Pseudomonas oryzihabitans (n= 1)

0

0

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

16.

Brevundimonas diminuta (n= 1)

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

17.

Elizabethkingia meningoseptica (n= 1)

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

No. of isolates

217, 26.8 %

191, 23.6 %

142, 17.5%

99, 12.2 %

88, 10.9%

47, 5.6%

18, 2.2%

5, 0.62%

3, 0.37%

 

Table 2: Antibiotic susceptibility profile of clinical isolates of NFGNB

Antibiot ics

Acinetoba cter species (n= 365)

Pseudom onas species (n= 348)

Burkholde ria cepacia (n= 47)

Achromoba cter species (n= 18)

Stenotropho monas maltophilia (n= 15)

Sphingomo nas paucimobilis (n= 15)

Brevundim ons diminuta (n= 1)

Elizabethkingia meningoseptica (n= 1)

(%)

(%)

R (%)

(%)

R (%)

S (%)

R (%)

(%)

R (%)

(%)

(%)

(%)

R (%)

(%)

(%)

(%)

PIT

92

8

58

42

IR

IR

38

62

IR

IR

27

73

0

100

100

0

CIP

91

9

71

29

-

-

66

34

-

-

47

53

0

100

100

0

TMP-SMX

73

27

IR

IR

21

79

55

45

33

67

-

-

-

-

100

0

CAZ

91

9

57

43

28

72

11

89

-

-

40

60

0

100

IR

IR

AT

IR

IR

52

48

IR

IR

77

23

IR

IR

80

20

0

100

100

0

CPM

84

16

47

53

IR

IR

17

83

-

-

13

87

0

100

100

0

GEN

88

12

63

37

IR

IR

83

17

IR

IR

47

53

0

100

100

0

AK

86

14

55

45

IR

IR

83

17

IR

IR

20

80

0

100

100

0

MI

30

70

-

-

25

75

39

61

27

73

-

-

-

-

-

-

LE

-

-

-

-

32

68

66

34

40

60

-

-

-

-

-

-

MRP

90

10

57

43

15

85

22

78

IR

IR

27

73

0

100

IR

IR

IPM

90

10

61

39

IR

IR

-

-

IR

IR

27

73

-

-

IR

IR

CL

6

94

21

79

IR

IR

-

-

IR

IR

IR

IR

0

100

IR

IR

PIT= Piparacillin/ Tazobactum, CIP= Ciprofloxacin, TMP-SMX= Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, CAZ= Ceftazidime, AT= Aztreonam, CPM= Cefepime, GEN= Gentamicin, AK= Amikacin, MI= Minocycline, LE= Levofloxacin, MRP= Meropenem, IPM= Imipenem, CL= Colistin, IR= Intrinsically resistant, S= Sensitive, R= Resistant

Overall, the NFGNB were isolated predominantly from the clinical samples of endotracheal aspirates (26.79%), followed by pus (23.58%) and blood (17.53%). The predominantly isolated NFGNB from endotracheal aspirate and pus were Acinetobacter baumannii and Pseudomonas aeruginosa respectively. The sample wise distribution of NFGNB is shown in Table 1. The sample wise distribution of NFGNB was not statistically significant at p-value of >0.05. The AST pattern of all clinical isolates of NFGNB against various antimicrobials is shown in Table 2. Overall, the Acinetobacter species exhibited higher resistance against carbapenems (90%) but good susceptibility against colistin (94%) and minocycline (70%). On the other hand, isolates of Pseudomonas species exhibited moderate susceptibility towards colistin (79%).

DISCUSSION

The rate of isolation of NFGNB in our study was found to be 15.43%. Slightly higher rate of isolation (18.8%) has been reported by Kumar et al. 8 However, Kishor et al, Kumar et al, Bansal et al and Soni et al reported lower isolation rate of 12.42%, 11.4%, 11.24% and 10.01% respectively. 9101112 The frequency of isolation of various pathogens depends on multiple factors including the healthcare associated as well as patient related factors. We observed Acinetobacter baumannii (42.22%) as most common isolate among NFGNB followed by Pseudomonas aeruginosa (39.01%) and Burkholderia cepacia (5.80%). More or less similar findings were also reported by Kumar et al and Kishor et al. 8911 The most of these studies did not report rare species including Achromobacter species, Sphingomonas paucimobilis, Brevundimonas diminuta, and Elizabethkingia meningoseptica. As these studies were based on the findings of conventional methods of identification, the probability of misidentification is high. The possibility of misidentification on conventional methods of identification is further supported by the studies based on automated identification including a study by Soni et al in which they also reported other rare pathogens. 12

In this study, majority of the NFGNB were isolated from endotracheal aspirate (ETA) comprising 26.8%, followed by pus (23.6%) and blood (17.5%). The Acinetobacter species were most commonly isolated from respiratory specimens (ETA) while Pseudomonas species were predominantly isolated from pus specimens. On the contrary, Soni et al and Gondha et al reported isolation of NFGNB most frequently from pus samples in their study. 1213 The majority of NFGNB in our study were isolated from samples received from admitted patients comprising 73.08% (42.22% from ICUs and 30.86% from wards) as compared to only 26.91% from OPD patients. The similar findings were also reported by Nazir et al. 14 The various risk factors included prolonged hospitalization in high-risk units, use of mechanical ventilation, underlying comorbidities such as burns, open wounds, surgical site infections, diabetes and malignancies highlighting the opportunistic nature of these pathogens.

The NFGNB were predominantly isolated from 40-60 years of age group, followed by young adults (21-40 years). The similar findings were also reported by Grewal et al and Berwal et al. 415 On the contrary, Nazir et al reported majority of NFGNB in the age group of < 10 years. 14 There was male predominance (67.39%) in our study with male to female ratio of 2.06:1. The male predominance is in accordance with various other studies carried out by Gondha et al, Patel et al and Madkey et al. 131617 However, Bansal et al and Berwal et al reported lower frequency of isolation among male patients as compared to female patients.1115 The variations in isolation rate of pathogens depending on demographic profile of patients may be due to variations in genetic and constitutional characteristics of the patients and associated comorbidities.

Most of the pathogens among NFGNB are intrinsically resistant to various antimicrobial groups and most of them are known to produce ESBLs and MBLs. 6 Most of the isolates in our study were MDR, posing a major clinical challenge in treating these. Acinetobacter baumannii exhibited higher resistance against carbapenems (90%) but good susceptibility against colistin (94%) and minocycline (70%). A comparable susceptibility to colistin and minocycline comprising 97.37% and 64.4% respectively was also reported by Soni et al. 12 Another study by Sengupta et al reported 100% susceptibility to colistin against Acinetobacter species.18 In this study, Pseudomonas species showed moderate susceptibility to colistin (79%) while only 39% isolates were showing susceptibility to carbapenems. On the contrary, Patel et al and Sarkar et al reported good susceptibility of Pseudomonas species to colistin, comprising 94.5% and 95% respectively. 1619

Contrary to our study, higher susceptibility of 70% to carbapenems was reported by Kumar et al, Gondha et al and Shah et al.101320 The variations in resistance pattern of antimicrobials may vary from hospital to hospital as well as from community to community on one hand while variations due to falsely reported results as a consequence of lack of recommended methods of testing especially against colistin.

The clinical isolates of Burkholderia cepacia complex exhibited good sensitivity towards meropenem (85%), trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (79%), minocycline (75%) and ceftazidime (72%). Almost similar findings were also reported in a study by Nazir et al in which they reported a good susceptibility of Burkholderia cepacia against meropenem and minocycline comprising 67.7% and 70% respectively. 14 While another study by Shah et al reported all the isolates of Burkholderia cepacia as sensitive against meropenem. 20 Our clinical isolates of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia showed moderate susceptibility to minocycline (73%), trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (67%) and levofloxacin (60%). However, Sannathimmappa et al reported much higher susceptibility of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia to minocycline (97%), trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (93%) and levofloxacin (92%). 21 Though the three drugs are promising therapeutic options for treatment of infections caused by Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, the intrinsic resistance of Burkholderia cepacia and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia towards majority of the drugs contribute to their ability to survive in diverse environments and evade antimicrobial therapy leading to frequent treatment failure.

The other less commonly isolated NFGNBs such as Achromobacter species and Sphingomonas paucimobilis showed varied susceptibility to different groups of antibiotics as shown in Table 2. More or less similar findings were also reported previously in different studies. 222324 The Achromobacter species were predominantly isolated from blood samples comprising 87.5 % isolates of Achromobacter species. Almost similar findings were reported recently by Siddique et al and Kar et al in 2023. 2324 Our data on sensitivity for Sphingomonas paucimobilis were similar to that reported by Rohilla et al where most of the isolates were having good susceptibility to cefepime. 25

Our isolate of Brevundimonas diminuta recovered from blood culture showed 100% sensitivity towards all the drugs, the resistance pattern was concordant with the study by Rani et al from the similar geographical region. 26 However, another single isolate of Elizabethkingia meningoseptica isolated from ETA showed pan-resistance against all the antimicrobials tested. In contrast to our study, Singh et al and Ganesan et al reported their Elizabethkingia meningoseptica exhibiting 100% susceptibility against minocycline and varied susceptibility against other drugs. 2728 This organism though isolated less frequently is known to survive in chlorine treated municipal water supplies, so it often colonizes sink basins and taps inside hospital settings and thus is a significant nosocomial threat.

The rare and emerging isolates reported in our study included Burkholderia cepacia, Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, Sphingomonas paucimobilis, and Elizabethkingia meningoseptica and all of these are intrinsically resistance to colistin. The misidentification will result in treatment failure if colistin is wrongly selected due to falsely reported colistin susceptibility. The possibility of misidentification of rare and intrinsically resistant NFGNB isolates on conventional testing is supported by many studies employing automated methods where these isolates were reported as compared to the studies employing conventional methods of identification usually missing out these isolates. 8911122728 We found that the changing trends as observed in this study highlighting the emergence of rare and intrinsically resistant isolates of NFGNB are in favour of exploration of the hidden instead of the changing trends.

This study was associated with certain limitations including the molecular characterization of species level identification of NFGNB isolates as well as genetic basis of resistance was not studied due to limited resources.

Conclusion

The automated or molecular methods are important for reliable identification and characterization of spectrum of pathogens as infrequent isolates are usually misidentified by conventional methods. The misidentification of NFGNB, especially those exhibiting intrinsic resistance to commonly used antimicrobials result in treatment failure due to wrongly selected intrinsically resistant antimicrobials. The reliable identification and susceptibility data can help clinicians while selecting appropriate antimicrobial treatment. The multidrug resistance exhibited by NFGNB pose great therapeutic concern as they have potential to survive in hospital environment leading to significant nosocomial threat. Therefore, identification and regular antimicrobial susceptibility surveillance of NFGNB, improved antibiotic stewardship and infection control measures are the need of the hour to control the emergence and spread of MDR strains of NFGNB in health care settings.

Source of Funding

Nil.

Conflicts of Interest

None declared.

References

  1. Procop GW, Church DL, Hall GS, Janda WM, Koneman EW, Schreckenberger PC. Koneman's Color Atlas and Textbook of Diagnostic Microbiology. (p. 1830 Pages) Philadelphia. Wolters Kluwer Health. 2017.
  2. Su SC, Vaneechoutte M, Dijkshoorn L, Wei YF, Chen YL, Chang TC. Identification of non-fermenting Gram-negative bacteria of clinical importance by an oligonucleotide arrayJournal of Medical Microbiology2009;58(Pt 5):596605. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1099/jmm.0.004606-0
  3. Perez F, Hujer AM, Hujer KM, Decker BK, Rather PN, Bonomo RA. Global challenge of multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumanniiAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2007;51(10):34713484. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01464-06
  4. Grewal US, Bakshi R, Walia G, Shah PR. Antibiotic susceptibility profiles of non-fermenting gram-negative Bacilli at a Tertiary Care Hospital in Patiala, IndiaNigerian Postgraduate Medical Journal2017;24(2):121125. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4103/npmj.npmj_76_17
  5. Juyal D, Prakash R, Shanakarnarayan SA, Sharma MK, Negi V, Sharma N. Prevalence of non-fermenting gram negative bacilli and their in vitro susceptibility pattern in a tertiary care hospital of Uttarakhand: A study from foothills of HimalayasSaudi Journal for Health Sciences2013;2(2):108112. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2278-0521.117915
  6. Malini A, Deepa EK, Gokul BN, Prasad S. Nonfermenting Gram-negative bacilli infections in a tertiary care hospital in Kolar, KarnatakaJournal of Laboratory Physicians2009;1(2):6266. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-2727.59701
  7. Gupta N, Gandham N, Vyawahare C, Mirza SB, Misra RN. A Study of Trends in Bacteremia with their Antibiotic Susceptibility in Different Age Groups from a Tertiary Care Hospital of PuneJournal of Krishna Institute of Medical Sciences University2021;10(1):5263. Available from: https://www.jkimsu.com/jkimsu-vol10no1/JKIMSU,%20Vol.%2010,%20No.%201,%20January-March%202021%20Page%2052-63.pdf
  8. Kumar R, Hassan AA, Kumar A, Kumar A. Non-fermenting Gram negative bacteria: a study on their prevalence and anti-microbial susceptibility pattern among patients admitted in a tertiary care hospital of BiharInternational Journal of Academic Medicine and Pharmacy2023;5(3):7780. Available from: https://doi.org/10.47009/jamp.2023.5.3.17
  9. Bansal R, Soni R, Tiwari YK. Prevalence of Non-Fermenters among Various Clinical Samples and their Antibiotic Resistance at Tertiary Care Centre Jhalawar, IndiaInternational Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences2019;8(7):18511858. Available from: https://www.ijcmas.com/8-7-2019/Rajesh%20Bansal,%20et%20al.pdf
  10. Nazir A, Peerzada BY, Sana I. Spectrum of non-fermenting Gram-negative bacilli isolated from patients with blood stream infections in a tertiary care hospital in North IndiaInternational Journal of Research in Medical Sciences2019;7(5):17621766. Available from: https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20191672
  11. Berwal A, Shobha KL, Gupta R, Gupta K, Ashraf AA, Kumar A, et al. Non-fermenting Gram negative bacteria as uropathogens in causing urinary tract infection and its antimicrobial susceptibility pattern at a Tertiary Care Centre of South IndiaJournal of Pure and Applied Microbiology2020;14(3):20332038. Available from: https://doi.org/10.22207/JPAM.14.3.43
  12. Patel A, Singh S. A clinical and microbiological study of non-fermenting Gram-negative bacilli in a tertiary care hospitalMedpulse International Journal of Microbiology2021;17(2):1219. Available from: https://doi.org/10.26611/10081722
  13. Madkey MV, Gajbhiye SR. Study of non-fermentative Gram-negative bacilliInternational Journal of Biomedical and Advance Research2019;10(5):5189. Available from: https://ssjournals.com/index.php/ijbar/article/view/5189/3501
  14. Sarkar M, Jena J, Pattnaik D, Mallick B. Prevalence of nonfermentative gram-negative bacilli and their antimicrobial susceptibility profiles in a tertiary care hospital of Eastern IndiaInternational Journal of Advances in Medicine2018;5(2):366370. Available from: https://doi.org/10.18203/2349-3933.ijam20181070
  15. Shah MH, Vaghela GM. Prevalence and antibiotic profile of non-fermenters at tertiary care hospital, SuratInternational Journal of Biomedical and Advance Research 2018;9(9):316318. Available from: https://doi.org/10.7439/ijbar.v9i9.4890
  16. Sannathimmappa MB, Nambiar V, Aravindakshan R, Al-Kasaby NM. Stenotrophomonas maltophilia: An emerging opportunistic nosocomial pathogen in a tertiary care hospital in Al Batinah North Governorate, OmanSultan Qaboos University Medical Journal2021;21(1):6671. Available from: https://doi.org/10.18295/squmj.2021.21.01.009
  17. Singh M, Raina D, Rohilla R, Narula H, Pandita A. Antimicrobial Susceptibility Pattern and Prevalence of the Emerging Nosocomial Pathogen Achromobacter xylosoxidans in a North Indian Tertiary Care HospitalJournal of Pure and Applied Microbiology2023;17(4):21492156. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.22207/jpam.17.4.11
  18. Siddiqui T, Patel SS, Ghoshal U, Sahu C. Clinicomicrobiological Profile of Infections by Achromobacter: An Emerging Nosocomial Pathogen in Indian HospitalsInternational Journal of Applied &amp; Basic Medical Research2023;13(2):5963. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.4103/ijabmr.ijabmr_520_22
  19. Kar M, Singh R, Tejan N, Jamwal A, Dubey A, Chaudhary R, et al. One year experience of Achromobacter bacteremia at a tertiary care hospital in Northern IndiaAccess Microbiology2023;5(9):115. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1099/acmi.0.000588.v3
  20. Rohilla R, Raina D, Singh M, Pandita AK, Patwal S. Evaluation of Sphingomonas paucimobilis as an emerging nosocomial pathogen in a teaching hospital in UttarakhandIranian Journal of Microbiology2021;13(5):617623. Available from: https://doi.org/10.18502/ijm.v13i5.7425
  21. Rani P, Singh N, Bhaskar M, Tandan N. Data on antibiotic resistance among indoor microbiome at Meerut, IndiaBioinformation2022;18(3):293298. Available from: https://doi.org/10.6026/97320630018293
  22. Ganesan V, Sundaramurthy R. Elizabethkingia meningoseptica Infections: A Case Series from a Tertiary Hospital in South Tamil NaduIndian Journal of Critical Care Medicine2022;26(8):958960. Available from: https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10071-24292

DON'T MISS OUT!

Subscribe now for latest articles and news.