Insights on toxin genotyping, virulence, antibiogram profiling, biofilm formation and efficacy of disinfectants on biofilms of Clostridium perfringens isolated from poultry, animals and humans

Abstract

Aims This study aimed to determine the toxin genotypes, virulence determinants and antibiogram of Clostridium perfringens isolated from poultry, animals and humans. Biofilm formation and the efficacy of disinfectants on C. perfringens biofilms were studied. Methods and Results Thirty C. perfringens isolates (20 clinical and 10 from chicken carcasses) were genotyped by PCR and all isolates were genotype A (cpa+). The overall prevalence of cpe, cpb2, netB and tpeL virulence genes was 6·7, 56·7, 56·7 and 36·7% respectively. Twenty‐one isolates (70%) were multidrug‐resistant, 8 (26·7%) were extensive drug‐resistant and one isolate (3·3%) was pan drug‐resistant. The average multiple antibiotic resistance index was 0·7. Biofilms were produced by 63·3% of C. perfringens isolates and categorized as weak (36·7%), moderate (16·7%) and strong (10%). Sodium hypochlorite caused significant reduction in C. perfringens biofilms (P < 0·0001). Conclusions All C. perfringens strains in this study were type A, resistant to multiple antibiotics and most of them were biofilm producers. Sodium hypochlorite showed higher efficacy in reducing C. perfringens biofilms. Significance and Impact of the Study This study reported the efficacy of disinfectants in reducing C. perfringens biofilms of economic and public health concern and recommends application on surfaces in farms, food processing plants and slaughterhouses.

Genetic Relatedness, Antibiotic Resistance, and Effect of Silver Nanoparticle on Biofilm Formation by Clostridium perfringens Isolated from Chickens, Pigeons, Camels, and Human Consumers

“…Multidrug resistance was observed in 92% of the isolates, of which 26% were XDR, and the MAR indices ranged from 0.28 to 0.9 with an average of 0.63. These findings conform with previous studies that showed the wide spread of MDR and XDR C. perfringens isolates due to the uncontrolled use of these drugs as growth promoters in animals and for therapeutic uses in humans and animals, which has caused increased resistance [59,62]. It has been shown that MAR higher than 0.2 could be due to contamination from high-risk sources, such as humans and farm animals frequently exposed to antibiotics, thus resulting in potential risk to consumers [73].…”

“…However, our results showed a high resistance rate of 94%, which is comparable with other studies [71,72]. The low resistance of the isolates to ampicillin, amoxicillin, and ampicillin-sulbactam coincides with another study in Egypt [59]. C. perfringens isolates were resistant to amoxicillin, ampicillin, cefotaxime, tetracycline, and clindamycin at rates of 16.1%, 29.8%, 11.3%, 63.7%, and 70.8%, respectively [4].…”

“…Our results conform with previously published studies that identified the cpb 2 gene in isolates from chickens [ 56 , 58 ], humans [ 47 ], and camels [ 58 ]. A recent study in Egypt documented a high frequency of the cpb 2 gene from C. perfringens isolates in various sources, including chickens and humans [ 59 ]. In the USA, all isolates from chicken and human patients were of type A, and the cpb 2 gene was isolated from 93% and 65% of chicken and human isolates, respectively [ 60 ].…”

“…The use of penicillin and tetracycline as growth promotors and for the control of Gram-positive bacterial infections may explain the resistance reported in our study to these drugs [ 69 ]. In contrast, penicillin and tetracyclines exhibited sufficient activity against C. perfringens isolates from chicken and human isolates [ 37 , 59 ]. Clindamycin was reported to be effective against C. perfringens isolates [ 70 ].…”

Detection of Clostridium perfringens and determination of enterotoxin genes (cpa and cpe) in traditional turkish chicken doner kebab

“…In one of their investigation, the cpe gene was also carried by 1/10 (10%) of chicken isolates by genotyping analysis. However, all isolates contained cpa gene and were identified as C. perfringens type A (7). Also in another study, Shaltout et al (33) reported that C. perfringens type A was detected 8/27 (29.6%) but cpe gene was not appointed by multiplex PCR assay.…”