• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Surveillance of multidrug resistant suppurative infection causing bacteria in hospitalized patients in an Indian tertiary care hospital

    2014-03-22 02:01:30NabakishoreNayakRajeshLenkaRabindraPadhy
    Journal of Acute Disease 2014年2期

    Nabakishore Nayak, Rajesh K. Lenka, Rabindra N. Padhy

    1Central Resarch Laboratory, IMS & Sum Hospital, Siksha 'O' Anusandhan Univrsity, K-8, Kalinga Nagar, Bhubaneswar 751003, Odisha, India

    2Department of Microbiologr, IMS & Sum Hospital, Siksha 'O' Anusandhan Univrsity, K-8, Kalinga Nagar, Bhubaneswar 751003, Odisha, India

    Surveillance of multidrug resistant suppurative infection causing bacteria in hospitalized patients in an Indian tertiary care hospital

    Nabakishore Nayak1,2, Rajesh K. Lenka2, Rabindra N. Padhy1*

    1Central Resarch Laboratory, IMS & Sum Hospital, Siksha 'O' Anusandhan Univrsity, K-8, Kalinga Nagar, Bhubaneswar 751003, Odisha, India

    2Department of Microbiologr, IMS & Sum Hospital, Siksha 'O' Anusandhan Univrsity, K-8, Kalinga Nagar, Bhubaneswar 751003, Odisha, India

    Objective: To examine antibiograms of a cohort of suppurative bacteria isolated from woundswabs from hospitalized patients of all economic groups of a typical Indian teaching hospital.

    Methods: In surveillance, antibiotic resistance patterns of 10 species of suppurative bacteria isolated from wound-swabs over a period of 24 months were recorded. Those were subjected to antibiotic sensitivity test, using 16 prescribed antibiotics of 5 different groups (3 aminoglycosides, 4 beta-lactams, 3 cephalosporins, 4 fluoroquinolones, and 2 stand-alone) in each 6-month interval of the study period. Results: Of 1 156 samples collected, 819 samples yielded pathogenic bacteria, of which, Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus), Streptococcus pyogenes (S. pyogenes), Escherichia coli (E. coli), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (P. aeruginosa), Enterococcus faecalis (E. faecalis), Klebsiella pneumoniae (K. pneumoniae), Acinetobacter baumannii (A. baumannii), Enterobacter aerogenes (E. aerogenes), Proteus mirabilis (P. mirabilis) and Proteus vulgaris (P. vulgaris) were isolated in the order of predominance. Isolated bacterial strains were floridly multidrug resistant. Strains of E. faecalis and S. aureus were found resistant to vancomycin, one of the newly introduced antibiotics. Conclusions: Of these S. aureus, particularly the methicillin resistant strain predominates, followed by strains of S. pyogenes and P. aeruginosa that were in the higher proportions of multidrug resistance.

    ARTICLE INFO

    Article history:

    Received 8 August 2013

    Received in revised form 15 September 2013

    Accepted 24 September 2013

    Available online 20 June 2014

    Wound-swabs

    Suppurative infections

    Hospitalized patients

    Pathogenic bacteria

    Multidrug resistance

    1. Introduction

    Infections at burn and surgical wounds with Grampositive (GP) and Gram-negative (GN) aerobic bacteria have become a constant source of consternation to clinicians and surgeons. In the last few decades, management of wounds and associated co-morbidities has been creating increasing levels of failures in their control, because of the emergence of multidrug resistant (MDR) bacteria, escalating to other body parts as blood stream infections (BSIs). Moreover, the decaying part of a burn-wound picks up opportunistic infections including fungi even, widening the opportunity for super-infection by several bacteria, both from community/hospital settings originally unrelated to skin; eventually, this leads to bacteremia in several vital organs idiosyncratic to type and the extent of drug resistance of the infecting bacterium[1]. Bacteria,Staphylococcus aureus(S. aureus),Enterococcus faecalis(E. faecalis) andStreptococcus pyogenes(S. pyogenes), as GPs, andPseudomonas aeruginosa(P. aeruginosa),Klebsiellasp.,Escherichia coli(E. coli),Proteussp.,Haemophilussp. andMoraxellasp., among GN aerobic bacteria, as well asBacteroidessp. andFusobacteriumsp., as anaerobic ones, are found mainly causing suppurations at wound sites, which lead to cystitis, otitis, boils, mastitis, phlebitis, meningitis, pneumonia, osteomyelitis, endocarditis urinary tract infection (UTI), and a few more[2]. Among opportunistic GNs,P. aeruginosaespecially is the ill-famed notorious pathogen linked to doggedly intractable burn injuries[3], promoting urinary tract infections (UTIs) even, leading to renal failure or/and endocarditis leading to heart failure, due to suppurative bacteria with portal entry as BSI[4]. Indeed, extrication fromthe pandemonium of burn injury is a staggering victory, and its management looms large to the clinician due to multiple infections by MDR bacteria. Specifically, infected surgical wounds cause suppurative skin reactions, bacterial fluid lesions and subcutaneous nodules leading to metastasis, when not properly addressed. An unattended/ unaddressed wound-site is the most vulnerable point of entry of the marauding pathogen that may cause bacteremia latter on, because of its multidrug resistance. Indeed, certain GN bacteria (P. aeruginosa,Acinetobacter baumannii(A. baumannii), andK. pneumoniae) have emerged with versatile strains, resistance to all antibiotics of the present time and such strains are informally known as pandrug resistant (PDR) bacteria[5,6].

    S. aureus, once known as a harmless commensal of nasal nares and soft tissues of the body, has became resistant to oxacillin/methicillin (penicillin-derivatives), and is known as, methicillin resistantS. aureus(MRSA). In an earlier study, IMS and Sum Hospital, Bhubaneswar, had reported resistance of MRSA to 23 antibiotics used at the present time[7,8], confirming it as the ‘superbug in health domain’, in this zone too. Intrinsically, MRSA has become the most common suppurative pathogen worldwide today, due to the armamentarium of multiple resistances, often creating an intractable situation in intensive and critical care units[7-9]. From the available literature, it could be spelled out that,S. aureushas several factors of potential virulence: (1) surface proteins promoting colonization in host tissues; (2) invasion-promoting proteins causing spread in host tissues; (3) surface factors inhibiting phagocytic engulfment by host cells of immune system, due to bacterial capsule and proteinase-A production; (4) inherent biochemical properties such as, catalase production; (5) immunological disguises such as, proteinase-A and coagulase productions by bacteria; (6) production of membrane degrading toxins, haemotoxin and leukotoxin that modify properties of eukaryotic cell membrane; (7) exotoxin production that damages host tissues by provoking symptoms of a disease[10]. Thus, the majority of diseases caused byS. aureusor MRSA and its other recent clonal nexuses are multifactorial. Human staphylococcal infections are more frequent, but they usually remain at the local entry spot because of limited activity of the host defense system at the injury spot. A hair follicle, needle-stick injury or a surgical wound itself would be common spots of portal entry of a pathogen.Staphylococcal pneumonia (S. pneumonia)is the frequent complication of pneumonia causing swelling, accumulation of pus and additional necrosis of lung-tissue in a more serious situation. Moreover, the inflamed area due toS. aureusis often a fibrin clot of bacteria and dead leukocytes, as a pus-filled boil or an abscess[11]. More serious infections byS. aureusof skin are furuncles or impetigo, and the localized bone infection is osteomyelitis; but BSI ofS. aureusleads to septicemia and bacteremia attacking lungs, kidney, heart, skeletal muscles and meninges, at least in old and immunocompromised patients, eventually causing utmost morbidity and significant mortality[1]. Other suppurative GP bacteria areStreptococcusandEnterococcus, which have developed parallel resistance to many antibiotics of the time[12]. More often than not, multiple bacterial infections are commonplace at injury sites.

    In face of accumulation of a vast majority of literature on MDR bacteria, it has become a matter of compulsion to conduct a regional surveillance on this exasperating class of pathogens, causing morbidity and mortality from general and surgical wound sites mainly[13]. This study records a gamut of antibiograms using 16 antibiotics of 5 groups of the time, with three GP and seven GN bacteria isolated from woundswabs of hospitalized patients of a typical Indian tertiary care hospital, a systematic study never reported before. This study should strengthen the epidemiological database of this vast subtropical country and other workers for a comparison as well as, in setting the stringent control of infections in a hospital. It is anticipated that this work would also benefit the pharmacy-world for further strategies in the crusade of the control of MDR bacteria, as wound infections give way to BSI and many more comorbidities. The infection dynamics of each bacterium studied here is so vast in literature that they would fill a book or two, when attempts would be made to describe their consternation in clinical management. This work examines antibiograms of a cohort of suppurative bacteria isolated from wound-swabs during 24 months from wards and cabins of the hospital, which treats patients of all economic groups, from slum dwellers and rural rustics to elite mass.

    2. Materials and methods

    2.1. Isolation and identification of bacteria

    Strains of three GP,E. faecalis,S. aureus,S. pyogenes, and seven GNA. baumannii,E. coli,E. aerogenes,K. pneumoniae,P. mirabilis,P. vulgaris, andP. aeruginosawere isolated from the in-house patients during the study period. The isolated GP and GN bacteria were identified basing upon their colony morphology and results obtained from standard biochemical test, as done previously[7,14,15]. Microbial Type Culture Collection (MTCC) strain of each GP or GN bacterium was used as the reference control in each biochemical test.

    2.2. Antibiotic susceptibility test

    All bacterial strains including the standard MTCC strains of each bacterium were subjected to antibiotic sensitivity tests by the Kirby-Bauer’s method/ disc diffusion method, using a 4 mm thick Mueller-Hinton (MH) agar (HiMedia, Mumbai) medium[16]. An aliquot of 0.1 mL of 0.5 McFarlandequivalents,approximately from an exponentially growing culture was spread on agar for the development of lawn of a strain of a bacterium at 37℃ in a BOD incubator (Remi CIM-12S). Further, on the lawn-agar of each plate, 8 high potency antibiotic discs (HiMedia) of 16 prescribed antibiotics of 5 different groups were placed, individually at equal distances from one another. Plates were incubated for 18 h at 37℃ and were examined for size-measurements of zones of inhibition around each disc, following the standard antibiotic susceptibility test chart of Clinical Laboratory Standard Institute (CLSI) guidelines[17].

    3. Results

    From hospitalized patients of wards and cabins of IMS and Sum Hospital, 1 156 wound-swabs samples yielded 819 strains of pathogenic bacteria belonging to 10 species (three GP and seven GN bacteria) during the span of 24 months (April 2011- March 2013). All strains (E. faecalis,S. aureus,S. pyogenes,A. baumannii,E. coli,E. aerogenes,K. pneumoniae,P. mirabilis,P. vulgarisandP. aeruginosa) were identified by standard biochemical tests and were maintained as axenic cultures in suitable media. In total, there were 52 strains ofE. faecalis, 251 strains ofS. aureus, 210 strains ofS. pyogenes, 48 strains ofA. baumannii, 39strains ofE. aerogenes, 62 strains ofE. coli, 53 strains ofK. pneumoniae, 24 strains ofP. mirabilis, 21 strains ofP. vulgarisand 59 strains ofP. aeruginosa. Thus,S. aureuswas the maximally isolated suppurative-infection-causing bacterium, followed byS. pyogenes,E. coli,P. aeruginosa,K. pneumoniae,E. faecalis,A. baumannii,E. aerogenes,P. mirabilisandP. vulgaris(Table 1). During the last 6-month period, minimum numbers of pathogens were isolated. GP bacteria as medium to large, smooth, entire, slightly raised, creamy yellow, green-coloured betahaemolytic colonies on blood agar, found positive to catalase and coagulase tests were confirmed asS. aureus. Similarly, characteristics the rest other GP and GN bacteria are presented (Tables 2 and 3).

    Table 1 Bacteria isolated from wound-swabs of the in-house wards patients.

    Table 2 Media used for isolation and maintenance pathogenic bacteria from urine samples and their colony characteristics.

    All isolated bacterial strains were subjected to antibiotic sensitivity tests with all antibiotics used, in each 6-month period. Three aminoglycoside antibiotics (μg/disc), amikacin-30, gentamicin-10 and tobramycin-10 were moderately resistant to ten species of pathogens used, in ranges, 27% to 76% of 52 strains ofE. faecalis, 31% to 79% of 251 strains ofS. aureus, 51% to 76% of 210 strains ofS. pyogenes, 25% to 71% of 48 strains ofA. baumannii, 36% to 78% of 39 strains ofE. aerogenes, 61% to 81% of 62 strains ofE. coli, 66% to 79% of 53 strains ofK. pneumoniae, 66% to 89% of 24 strains ofP. mirabilis, 61% to 71% of 21 strains ofP. vulgaris, 66% to 86% of 59 strains ofP. aeruginosa. Among these three antibiotics, amikacin was the most resistant antibiotic to these pathogens (Table 4). Mean percent values of resistant strains of individual bacteria are discernible (Table 4).

    Similarly, percentages of resistance patterns of 3 GP bacteria with four antibiotics of the beta-lactam group are detailed (Table 5); resistance patterns were in ranges: 52 to 74% of 52 strains ofE. faecalis, 61 to 82% of 251 strains ofS. aureus, and 47 to 76% of 210 strains ofS. pyogenes. Likewise, GN bacteria were tested for three beta-lactams only with resistance patterns as given: 47% to 77% of 48 strains ofA. baumannii, 52% to 81% of 39 strains ofE. aerogenes, 51% to 89% of 62 strains ofE. coli, 54% to 83% of 53 strains ofK. pneumoniae, 22% to 43% of 24 strains ofP. mirabilis, 34% to 48% of 21 strains ofP. vulgaris, 41% to 75% of 59 strains ofP. aeruginosa. For GN bacteria, antibiotics were resistant in the order: ampicillin >piperacillin/ tazobactam > amoxyclav. But with GP bacteria such an order would be: ampicillin > piperacillin/ tazobactam > oxacillin > amoxyclav (Table 5). Mean percentvalues of resistant strains of individual bacteria are evident in the Table 5.

    Table 3 Biochemical identifications of isolated Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria.

    Table 4 Percentage of resistance of all clinically isolated bacteria to three antibiotics of aminoglycoside group.

    Further, resistance-percent values of suppurativeinfection-causing bacteria to the cephalosporin group (cefepime, ceftazidime and ceftriaxone), in three 6-month phases were in ranges, 57% to 76% of 52 strains ofE. faecalis, 51% to 76% of 251 strains ofS. aureus, 51% to 85% of 210 strains ofS. pyogenes, 45% to 64% of 48 strains ofA. baumannii, 52% to 72% of 39 strains ofE. aerogenes, 75% to 88% of 62 strains ofE. coli, 54% to 74% of 53 strains ofK. pneumoniae, 32% to 51% of 24 strains ofP. mirabilis, 36% to 46% of 21 strains ofP. vulgaris, 49% to 77% of 59 strains ofP. aeruginosa(Table 6). All these three antibiotics were almost equally resistant to the isolated suppurative pathogens, confirming the consistence in the production of ESBL by majority of isolates.

    Similarly, resistance-percent values of suppurative infection causing bacteria to antibiotics of the fluoroquinolone group (gatifloxacin, levofloxacin, ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin) in three 6-month phases were in ranges, 51% to 76% of 52 strains ofE. faecalis, 68% to 89% of 251 strains ofS. aureus, 44% to 65% of 210 strains ofS. pyogenes, 45% to 77% of 48 strains ofA. baumannii, 47% to 81% of 39 strains ofE. aerogenes, 60% to 87% of 62 strains ofE. coli, 58% to 81% of 53 strains ofK. pneumoniae, 25% to 49% of 24 strains ofP. mirabilis, 25% to 45% of 21 strains ofP. vulgaris, 54% to 81% of 59 strains ofP. aeruginosa(Table 7). These antibiotics were resistant to all these pathogens in the order: ofloxacin > gatifloxacin > norfloxacin >levofloxacin; the later one was newly introduced.

    Lastly, detailed percentage values of GP bacteria were: 26% to 32% of 52 strains ofE. faecalis, 36% to 39% of 251 strains ofS. aureusand 34% to 47% of 210 strains ofS. pyogenesfor linezolid. The resistance patterns of 2 GP bacteria to the stand-alone antibiotic, vancomycin were in ranges was in ranges, 15% to 19% of 52 strains ofE. faecalis, and 11% to 17% of 251 strains ofS. aureus(Table 8). The emergence of vancomycin resistant mutants is a matter of clinical concern. Of 819 bacterial isolates in this study,S. aureus,S. pyogenes,P. aeruginosa,E. faecalis,K. pneumoniae,A. baumannii,E. aerogenesandProteussp. were found in the order of predominance to antibiotic resistance. This study recorded that all of these pathogens isolated from clinical samples were resistant to all antibiotics individually used.

    Table 5 Percentage of resistance of all clinically isolated bacteria to four antibiotics of β-lactam group.

    Table 6 Percentage of resistance of all clinical isolated bacteria to three antibiotics of cephalosporin group.

    Table 7 Percentage of resistance of all clinical isolated bacteria to four antibiotics of fluoroquinolone group.

    Table 8 Percentage of resistance of all clinical isolated Gram-positive bacteria to two stand-alone antibiotics.

    Figure 1. Colonies of S. pyogenes on blood agar.

    4. Discussion

    Surgical wound-sites are generally taken care of suitably, as those wounds are planned, but burn injuries create beleaguered conditions in hospitals. Burn wounds, occurring impromptu, promote multiple infections due to the damage of the skin, the physical barrier, and cause immune suppression, independently[18]. Wounds being the invasive site for staphylococci, streptococci and enterococci among GPs, and GNs including pugnacious/PDR strains ofAcinetobacter,Klebsiella, Pseudomonasand a few more genera, are a priory, the prominent reckless nosocomial pathogens. Moreover, the ominousA. baumanniiin wounds is the most rife or notorious peripatetic, etiological agent in hospital acquired infections[19]; it is a PDR pathogen[5,14,20], affording much difficulty for its control.

    For the control of wounds, topical antibacterial agents are used in addition to systemic ones. The popular topical antimicrobial, Acticoat with the silver sulfadiazine influences the respiratory chain at the cytochrome level, by disrupting the microbial electron transport system mediated by the silver ion[21]. In fact, because of the slow release of silver ions from Acticoat, a stronger and longer antimicrobial effect had been recorded, compared to the other classical silver containing topical agents. Thus, it was found as the more effective agent against aerobic, anaerobic GPs and GNs, fungi, and viruses on wound sites[21]. Another broad spectrum topical antibiotic obtained fromPseudomonas fluorescens, mupirocin had been recorded strongly inhibiting protein and RNA synthesis in pathogens[22]. Moreover,A. baumanniiin burn injury infections causes delay in the wound healing process, probably due to its ability to cause systemic circulation; sepsis mostly occurs ending with high mortality rates with patients who were inadequately treated[20,23]. Acticoat, however, was independently reported to control MDRA. baumannii,in vivoby other workers[18,24]. Octanidiene dihyrocholride is another topical antibacterial agent used in the control of active and chronic wounds[23,25]without any disadvantage of the other chemical, silver sulfadiazine, as the later has a lower escher-penetration rate, needing frequent applications, whereas octenidine dihydrochloride based formulations are effective against GPs, GNs and fungi[26]. Quintessentially, Acticoat had appreciable control actions over octanidiene dihyrocholride or chlorhexidine acetate onA. baumannii[23]. Sofra-tulle (framycetin sulphate bp 1%), framyzyne are sulfamylone creams, also are used as topical applications for burn injuries withPseudomonasinfections. Indeed, aggressive uses of antibiotics lead to conditions for the growth of fungi in burns;Candida albicansis the most common associated fungal pathogen[27]. Powdered sulfonamides, as well as, its cream-based formulations had been a popular topical medicine for burn wounds, with a limited absorption of sulfonamides at injured sites. Further, in children, agranulocytes are induced with another control agent, sulfapyridine, when applied to burn injuries. Therefore, sulfonamide creams are rarely used for burn injuries. Nevertheless, sulfadyazine are less readily absorbed in the body in comparison to sulfonamides[28].

    GP bacteria particularly survive the thermals of burning, unless an immediate topical treatment is done around 48 hours; staphylococci come up from the sweat glands and hair follicles colonizing at the burn site[29]. In a typical study, from surgical wounds analyzed with 343 patients,S. aureuswas prevalent at 28.2%,P. aeruginosaat 25.32%,E. coliat 7.8%,S. epidermidisat 7.1% andE. faecalisat 5.6%[30].Proteussp. particularly was reported to have been isolated from an Indian tertiary care hospital; all the isolated strains of pathogens were resistant to the entire antibiotics group used, among which,S. aureusin GPs,A. baumanniiandP. aeruginosaamong GNs had the maximum resistance values[31]. In a study from Netherlands, it was reported that a cohort of 11 patients and nurses of the surgical ward of a hospital were infected withS. pyogeneswith a particular serotype of low virulence; another group of patients from the same hospital had infection with another serotype ofS. pyogenescausing heavy delay in wound healing[32]. This study clearly demonstrated the outbreak ofS. pyogenesinfections in hospital settings.

    Apart from surgical wounds, post-operative peritonitis is an important determinant in toxic shock syndrome in ICU patients. In a study from Paris, it was found that GP bacteria were prevalent in 40% of cases andE. faeciumwas the leading organism (19%), followed by streptococci (11%),S. aureus(3%), coagulase negative staphylococci (8%). Similarly, among infections from GNs, Enterobacteriaceae members contribute 37% of the total infection;E. coliwere 18%, and the rest other bacteria were as follows:Enterobacter8%,Klebsiella5%,Morganella3%,Proteus2%,Citrobacter2%;Pseudomonas6% andA. baumannii1%. The prevalence of the total anaerobic bacteria causing post-operative peritonitis in this study was 13% with the predominance ofBacteroidessp. Among all these bacteria, the prevalence of MDR Enterobacteriaceae was 5% and that ofP. aeruginosawas 2%[33]. An Indian study, however, recorded increasing incidences of MDRKlebsiellasp., isolated from 72% infected hospitalized patients, out of which, 3.44% isolates were capable of the production ofKlebsiella pneumoniaecarbapenemase enzyme, of which 26 strains from hospital and 8 strains were from community isolates[34]. From Greece, MDR GN bacteria were reported from ICU surgical patients; it was reported that hospitalization for more than 5 days increased the susceptibility towards MDR infections[13]. Sternal wound infections after cardiac surgery were caused by MRSA and GNs in 22.4%, within two years of study with 1895 patients in France[35]. It is consensus that a patient admitted to a hospital, more often with resource-limited settings, for a specific problem or even due to problems of old age, picks up one or more MDR infectious bacteria. Risk-factors of post-discharge invasive infection from MRSA in hospitalized patients can be imagined, as monitored with MRSA in the USA through BSI for its high rates of antibiotic resistance, for example[36].

    It is believed that antibiotics are symbol and substance of clinical management today, and it is hard to think of an aspect of contemporary life that does not depend on antibiotics. Taking to surprise, nosocomial spread of MDR bacteria has become so commonplace that clinicians of both developing and developed countries get often emotionally grueled during treatment to delirious hospitalized patients of any ailment, with whom an infection on hospitalization with an MDR bacterium could be a terminal illness. As known, several factors contribute to the problem of the emergence of MDR bacteria: (1) Device-and-fomite-associated nosocomial infections are frequent in hospital settings everywhere and always[37], with begrimed settings. (2) The drug resistance character has ramifications: bacteria may be resistance to representative, frequently used antibiotics of several classes; paradigmatically, the production of extended spectrum β-lactamase has rendered resistance to antibiotics of penicillin/cephalosporin group[38]; carbapenemase production affords resistance in GN bacteria to carbapenems (imipenem, meropenem and ertapenem) in use. (3) Mutation rates in bacteria are faster because of simple, plastic genomes — one mutant cell in 106 to 108 bacterial cells in the presence of an antibiotic-stress is known to be drug resistant[39]. (4) To avoid host toxicity, antibiotics doses are mostly fixed at some lower concentration that is often below the mutant preventive concentration [40], giving ways to the development of mutants. (5) Genetic recombinationmechanisms (bacterial transformation and conjugation) are operative in natural systems, such as hospital sewages, facilitating the creation of a pool of drug resistant characters in camaraderie MDR strains[41]. (6) Absence of a stringent antibiotic policy triggers the emergence of resistant bacteria as both clinicians and patients use antibiotics belonging to higher generations without often being warranted. (7) Patients, particularly, often do not complete the course of prescribed dose of an antibiotic, because of the blithesome effect of the control of infection from the start of the course. Thus, bacterial resistance to antibiotics is a consistently complex and dynamic affair, involving major genetic and biochemical mechanisms, bacterial transformations, interchange of integrons, hypermutabilty, plasmids mediated improvements in resistance factors, ending with drug efflux mechanism and gaining of characters to synthesize indigenous and exogenous antibiotic degrading enzymes.

    This study demonstrated that most of these pathogens isolated from clinical samples were MDR and they are potential enough to destroy the clinical totem pole of a hospital and to precipitate devastating episodes in the community. As analyzed, suppurative infections are one of the major problems of health, as MDR bacteria could attack several organs such as lungs, heart and kidneys, through BSI. Compared to infection studies on suppurative pathogens from other hospitals globally, the surveillance data of this typical hospital clearly gives high values of wound infections among which, the MRSA infection predominates. Burn injuries are needed to be attended more stringently in this peninsula too. Steps to prevent invasive infections of most of these pathogens, particularly MRSA in communities must be started in the hospital with proper/ prior post-discharge settings.

    Conflicts of interests

    The authors declare that they have no conflict of interests.

    Acknowledgements

    This work is a part of PhD thesis of N Nayak in Biotechnology of S‘O’A University and he is too supported by the university as JRF. Part of the work was supported by project no. 21/ (0859)/11/EMR-II, CSIR, New Delhi to RN Padhy. IMS and Sum Hospital provided extended facilities.

    [1] Pop-Vicas A, Tacconelli E, Gravenstein S, Lu B, D’Agata EM. Influx of multidrug-resistant, gram-negative bacteria in the hospital setting and the role of elderly patients with bacterial blood stream infection. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2009; 30: 325-331.

    [2] Nia KM, Sepehri G, Khatmi H, Shakibaie MR. Isolation and antimicrobial susceptibility of bacteria from chronic suppurative otitis media patients in Kerman, Iran. Iran Red Crescent Med J 2011; 13: 891-894.

    [3] Bielecki P, Pucha?ka J, Wos-Oxley ML, Loessner H, Glik J, et al. In vivo expression profiling of Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections reveals niche-specific and strain-independent transcriptional programs. PLoS ONE 2011; 6(9): e24235.

    [4] Dryden MS. Complicated skin and soft tissue infections. J Antimicrob Chemother 2010; 65: 35-44

    [5] Falagas ME, Bliziotis IA, Kasiakou SK, Samonis G, Athanassopoulou P, Michalopoulos A. Outcome of infections due to pandrug-resistant (PDR) Gram-negative bacteria. BMC Infect Dis 2005; 5: 24.

    [6] Kujath P, Kujath C. Complicated skin, skin structure and soft tissue infections - are we threatened by multi-resistant pathogens? Eur J Med Res 2010; 15: 544-553.

    [7] Dubey D, Padhy RN. Surveillance of multidrug resistance of two Gram-positive pathogenic bacteria in a teaching hospital and in vitro efficacy of 30 ethno-medicinal plants used by an aborigine of India. Asian Pacif J Trop Dis 2012; 2: 273-281.

    [8] Dubey D, Rath S, Sahu MC, Pattnaik L, Debata NK, Padhy RN. Surveillance of infection status of drug resistant Staphylococcus aureus in an Indian teaching hospital. Asian Pacif J Trop Dis 2012; 3: 133-142.

    [9] Sisirak M, Zvizdic A, Hukic M. MRSA as a cause of nosocomial wound infections. Bosn J Basic Med Sci 2010; 10: 32-37.

    [10] Gordon RJ, Lowy FD. Pathogenesis of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection. Clin Infect Dis 2008; 46: S350-S359.

    [11] Zeller JL, Burke AE, Glass RM. JAMA patient page. MRSA infections. JAMA 2007; 298: 18-26.

    [12] Sood S, Malhotra M, Das BK, Kapil A. Enterococci were originally classified as enteric Gram-positive cocci and later included in the genus Streptococcus. Indian J Med Res 2008; 128: 111-121.

    [13] Alexiou VG, Michalopoulos A, Makris GC, Peppas G, Samonis G, Falagas ME. Multidrug resistant Gram-negative bacterial infection in surgical patients hospitalized in the ICU: A cohort study. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2012; 31:557-566.

    [14] Rath S, Dubey D, Sahu MC, Debata NK, Padhy RN. Surveillance of multidrug resistance of 6 uropathogens in a teaching hospital and in vitro control by 25 ethnomedicinal plants used by an aborigine of India. Asian Pacif J Trop Biomed 2012; 2: S818-S829.

    [15] Rath S, Padhy RN. Monitoring in vitro antibacterial efficacy of Terminalia alata Heyne ex. Roth, against multidrug resistant enteropathogenic bacteria. J Act Med 2013; 3: 93-102

    [16] Sahu MC, Rath S, Dubey D, Debata NK, Padhy RN. Multidrug resistance of Pseudomonas aeruginosa as known from surveillanceof nosocomial and community infections in an Indian teaching hospital. J Pub Health 2012; 20: 413-423.

    [17] CLSI-Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance standard for antimicrobial susceptibility testing: twenty-first informational supplement. Document M 200-S21; Wayne, 2011.

    [18] Glasser JS, Guymon CH, Mende K, Wolf SE, Hospenthal DR, Murray CK. Activity of topical antimicrobial agents against multidrug-resistant bacteria recovered from burn patients. Burns 2010; 36: 1172-1184.

    [19] Dallo SF, Weitao T. Insights into Acinetobacter war wound infections, biofilms and control. Adv Skin Wound Care 2010; 23: 169-174.

    [20] Mihu MR, Sandkovsky U, Han G, Friedman JM, Nosanchuk JD, Martinez LR. Nitric oxide releasing nanoparticles are therapeutic for Acinetobacter baumannii wound infections. Virulence 2010; 1: 62-67.

    [21] Ulkur E, Okul O, Karagoz H, Yeniz E, Celikoz B. Comparison of silver-coated dressing (Acticoat), chlorhexidine acetate 0.5% (Bactigras), and fusidic acid 2% (Fucidin) for topical antibacterial effect in methicillin-resistant staphylococci-contaminated, fullskin thickness rat burn wounds. Burns 2005; 31: 874-877.

    [22] Acikel C, Oncul O, Ulkur E, Bayram I, Celikoz B, Cavuslu S. Comparison of silver sulfadiazine 1%, mupirocine 2% and fusidic acid 2% for topical antibacterial effect in methicillin resistant staphylococci-infected full-skin thickness rat burn wounds. J Burn Care Rehabil 2003; 24: 37-41.

    [23] Uygur F, Oncul O, Evinc R, Diktas H, Acar A, Ulkur E. Effects of three different topical antibacterial dressings on Acinetobacter baumannii contaminated full-thickness burns in rats. Burns 2009; 35: 270-273.

    [24] Davis SC, Pisanni F, Montero RB. Effects of commonly used topical antimicrobial agents on Acinetobacter baumannii: an in vitro study. Mil Med 2008; 173: 74-78.

    [25] Wolcott RD, Rhoads DD, Bennett ME, Wolcott BM, Gogokhia L, Costerton JW, et al. Chronic wounds and the medical bio-film paradigm. J Wound Care 2010; 19: 45-46, 48-50, 52-53

    [26] Rigopoulos D, Rallis E, Gregoriou S, Larios G, Belyayeva Y, Gkouvi K, et al. Treatment of Pseudomonas nails infections with 0.1% octenidine dihydrochloride solution. Dermatology 2009; 218: 67-68.

    [27] Isibor JO, Oseni A, Eyaufe A, Osagie R, Turay A. Incidence of aerobic bacteria and Candida albicans in post-operative wound infections. Afr J Microbiol Res 2008; 2: 288-291.

    [28] International consensus. Appropriate use of silver dressings in wounds. An expert working group consensus[Online]. Available from: http://www.woundsinternational.com. [Accessed January 15, 2013]

    [29] Erol S, Altoparlak U, Akcay MN, Celebi F, Parlak M. Changes of microbial flora and wound colonization in burned patients. Burns 2004; 30: 357-361.

    [30] Giacometti A, Cirioni O, Schimizzi AM, Del Prete MS, Barchiesi S, D’Errico MM, et al. Epidemiology and microbiology of surgical wound infections. J Clin Microbiol 2000; 38: 918-922

    [31] Ravisekhar G, Bernu D, Vishnu B, Hartla S, Arti K, Ammini AC, Rama C. Clinical microbiological study of diabetic foot ulcers in an Indian tertiary-care hospital. Diabetic Care 2006; 29: 1727-1732.

    [32] Davies BI, Hirsch J, Werink TJ, Toenbreker H, Bainczijk F, van Leeuwen WJ. A Streptococcus pyogenes outbreak caused by an unusual serotype of low virulence: the value of typing techniques in outbreak investigations. J Infect 1999; 38: 185-190.

    [33] Augustin P, Kermarrec N, Muller-Serieys C, Lasocki S, Chosidow D, Marmuse JP, et al. Risk factors for multidrug resistant bacteria and optimization of empirical antibiotic therapy in postoperative peritonitis. Crit Care 2010; 14: R20.

    [34] Jadhav S, Misra RN, Gandham N, Ujagare M, Ghosh P, Kalpana A, et al. Increasing incidence of multidrug resistance Klebsiella pneumoniae infections in hospital and community settings. Int J Microbiol Res 2012; 4: 253-257.

    [35] Maillet JM, Oghina G, Le Besnerais P, Thierry S, Bouquet G, Mesnildrey P, et al. Preoperative carriage and postoperative samespecies sternal wound infection after cardiac surgery. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2011; 13: 381-385.

    [36] Duffy J, Dumyati G, Bulens S, Namburi S, Gellert A, Fridkin SK, et al. Community-onset invasive methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections following hospital discharge. Am J Infect Control 2013; doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2012.10.020.

    [37] Crnich CJ, Drinka P. Medical device - associated infections in the long-term care setting. Infect Dis Clin North Am 2012; 26: 143-164.

    [38] Shahcheraghi FM, Rahbar SM, Zahraei VS, Shooraj F. Transmission of Vibrio cholera O1 serotype inaba in a rural area of qazvin, Iran Associated with Drinking Water. Asian J Epidemiol 2009; 2: 66-71.

    [39] Gillespie SH, Basu S, Dickens AL, O’Sullivan DM, McHugh TD. Effect of sub-inhibitory concentrations of ciprofloxacin on Mycobacterium fortuitum mutation rates. J Antimicrob Chemother 2005; 56: 344-348.

    [40] Ferrari R, Magnani M, Souza RB, Tognim MCB, Oliveira TCRM. Mutant prevention concentration (MPC) of ciprofloxacin against Salmonella enterica of epidemic and poultry origin. Curr Microbiol 2011; 62: 628-632.

    [41] Perron GG, Lee AEG, Wang Y, Huang WE, Barraclough TG. Bacterial recombination promotes the evolution of multi-drugresistance in functionally diverse populations. Proc Biol Sci 2012; 279: 1477-1484.

    ment heading

    10.1016/S2221-6189(14)60033-0

    *Corresponding author: Prof. Dr. R. N. Padhy, CSIR Scientist, Central Research Laboratory, IMS & Sum Hospital, Siksha ‘O’ Anusandhan University, K-8, Kalinga Nagar, Bhubaneswar 751003, Odisha, India.

    Tel: +919437134982

    E-mail: rnpadhy54@yahoo.com

    Part of the work was supported by project no. 21/(0859)/11/EMR-II, CSIR, New Delhi to RN Padhy.

    女警被强在线播放| 国产麻豆69| 亚洲精品一二三| 亚洲五月色婷婷综合| 久久国产精品人妻蜜桃| 久久这里只有精品19| 免费女性裸体啪啪无遮挡网站| 考比视频在线观看| 亚洲国产欧美在线一区| 老汉色av国产亚洲站长工具| 亚洲精品久久成人aⅴ小说| 丝袜喷水一区| 久久狼人影院| 国产淫语在线视频| 狂野欧美激情性bbbbbb| 18禁黄网站禁片午夜丰满| 乱人伦中国视频| 动漫黄色视频在线观看| 久久久久国产精品人妻一区二区| 老司机在亚洲福利影院| 五月天丁香电影| 搡老熟女国产l中国老女人| 精品久久蜜臀av无| 欧美亚洲 丝袜 人妻 在线| 肉色欧美久久久久久久蜜桃| 在线天堂中文资源库| 美女高潮到喷水免费观看| 亚洲中文av在线| 日本精品一区二区三区蜜桃| 亚洲av电影在线进入| av视频免费观看在线观看| 99久久99久久久精品蜜桃| 嫁个100分男人电影在线观看| 一本一本久久a久久精品综合妖精| 新久久久久国产一级毛片| 午夜影院在线不卡| 欧美av亚洲av综合av国产av| 日本五十路高清| 亚洲成人免费电影在线观看| 欧美黄色淫秽网站| 午夜久久久在线观看| 十分钟在线观看高清视频www| 丝袜美腿诱惑在线| 蜜桃在线观看..| 欧美变态另类bdsm刘玥| 亚洲第一av免费看| 国产主播在线观看一区二区| 97人妻天天添夜夜摸| 久9热在线精品视频| 国产有黄有色有爽视频| 国产一区二区三区综合在线观看| 一边摸一边做爽爽视频免费| 中国国产av一级| 桃花免费在线播放| 免费人妻精品一区二区三区视频| 最近中文字幕2019免费版| 人妻一区二区av| 精品亚洲成国产av| 国产日韩欧美视频二区| 午夜福利影视在线免费观看| 99热网站在线观看| 在线永久观看黄色视频| 午夜免费观看性视频| av网站在线播放免费| 黄色怎么调成土黄色| svipshipincom国产片| 国产成人欧美在线观看 | 黄色毛片三级朝国网站| √禁漫天堂资源中文www| 中国国产av一级| 久久久久久久久免费视频了| 国产激情久久老熟女| 亚洲国产av影院在线观看| 久9热在线精品视频| 一级片免费观看大全| 老司机影院毛片| 国产一区二区激情短视频 | 午夜精品久久久久久毛片777| 国产精品一区二区在线观看99| 久久亚洲国产成人精品v| 国产深夜福利视频在线观看| www日本在线高清视频| 国产在视频线精品| 黑人操中国人逼视频| 黑人欧美特级aaaaaa片| 亚洲国产精品一区三区| 国产欧美日韩综合在线一区二区| cao死你这个sao货| 俄罗斯特黄特色一大片| 亚洲av美国av| 国产亚洲av片在线观看秒播厂| 乱人伦中国视频| 精品国产超薄肉色丝袜足j| 亚洲精品国产av成人精品| av国产精品久久久久影院| 一级毛片电影观看| 成人国产av品久久久| 天天影视国产精品| 一边摸一边做爽爽视频免费| 亚洲专区字幕在线| 日日夜夜操网爽| 午夜激情久久久久久久| 18在线观看网站| 美女脱内裤让男人舔精品视频| 欧美日本中文国产一区发布| 国产免费av片在线观看野外av| 欧美黑人精品巨大| 日韩电影二区| 国产日韩欧美在线精品| 亚洲少妇的诱惑av| 国产日韩欧美视频二区| 99国产精品一区二区三区| 亚洲精品av麻豆狂野| 在线观看免费高清a一片| 欧美日韩亚洲国产一区二区在线观看 | 动漫黄色视频在线观看| 一级黄色大片毛片| 99久久综合免费| 99九九在线精品视频| 午夜福利视频精品| 欧美久久黑人一区二区| 777米奇影视久久| 色综合欧美亚洲国产小说| 日韩制服骚丝袜av| 国产黄频视频在线观看| 亚洲欧美成人综合另类久久久| 美女主播在线视频| 最黄视频免费看| 亚洲精品中文字幕一二三四区 | 国产日韩欧美在线精品| 午夜视频精品福利| 国产精品麻豆人妻色哟哟久久| 免费黄频网站在线观看国产| 亚洲精品国产av蜜桃| 亚洲成人免费电影在线观看| 国产精品一区二区精品视频观看| 欧美 亚洲 国产 日韩一| 丝袜美足系列| 色播在线永久视频| 99久久综合免费| 午夜福利影视在线免费观看| 人妻人人澡人人爽人人| 午夜91福利影院| 啦啦啦在线免费观看视频4| 免费一级毛片在线播放高清视频 | 久久久久精品人妻al黑| 成年人免费黄色播放视频| 精品人妻熟女毛片av久久网站| 美女高潮喷水抽搐中文字幕| 亚洲精品久久成人aⅴ小说| 女人高潮潮喷娇喘18禁视频| 国产野战对白在线观看| 巨乳人妻的诱惑在线观看| 成年动漫av网址| 国产精品久久久av美女十八| av天堂在线播放| 亚洲欧美激情在线| 国产无遮挡羞羞视频在线观看| 97人妻天天添夜夜摸| 亚洲专区国产一区二区| 一本久久精品| 九色亚洲精品在线播放| 国产精品久久久久久精品古装| 自线自在国产av| 国产成人系列免费观看| 亚洲欧美色中文字幕在线| 精品国产一区二区三区四区第35| 天天躁狠狠躁夜夜躁狠狠躁| 99国产极品粉嫩在线观看| 欧美在线黄色| 极品少妇高潮喷水抽搐| 欧美+亚洲+日韩+国产| 三上悠亚av全集在线观看| 亚洲全国av大片| 国产野战对白在线观看| 国产亚洲av片在线观看秒播厂| 久久精品aⅴ一区二区三区四区| 啦啦啦免费观看视频1| tube8黄色片| 欧美在线黄色| 免费少妇av软件| 男女无遮挡免费网站观看| 两个人免费观看高清视频| 丝瓜视频免费看黄片| 人人妻,人人澡人人爽秒播| 丝瓜视频免费看黄片| 久久久国产欧美日韩av| 巨乳人妻的诱惑在线观看| 久久精品熟女亚洲av麻豆精品| 大香蕉久久网| 国产精品.久久久| 色94色欧美一区二区| 国产av精品麻豆| 亚洲国产精品一区二区三区在线| 中文字幕另类日韩欧美亚洲嫩草| 最近中文字幕2019免费版| 男女下面插进去视频免费观看| 国产免费福利视频在线观看| 性色av乱码一区二区三区2| 国产免费福利视频在线观看| 欧美xxⅹ黑人| 日韩,欧美,国产一区二区三区| 日本黄色日本黄色录像| 欧美日韩中文字幕国产精品一区二区三区 | 精品人妻一区二区三区麻豆| 波多野结衣av一区二区av| 日韩欧美一区二区三区在线观看 | 91麻豆精品激情在线观看国产 | 精品国产乱子伦一区二区三区 | 亚洲全国av大片| 麻豆国产av国片精品| 嫁个100分男人电影在线观看| 成年人黄色毛片网站| 青草久久国产| 免费观看a级毛片全部| 日本wwww免费看| 日本vs欧美在线观看视频| 男女下面插进去视频免费观看| 欧美精品人与动牲交sv欧美| 亚洲国产欧美一区二区综合| 国产精品偷伦视频观看了| 麻豆国产av国片精品| 欧美黄色淫秽网站| 久久久精品94久久精品| 国产精品 欧美亚洲| 淫妇啪啪啪对白视频 | 9热在线视频观看99| 狂野欧美激情性bbbbbb| 秋霞在线观看毛片| 国产日韩欧美视频二区| 热re99久久精品国产66热6| 亚洲 国产 在线| 一边摸一边抽搐一进一出视频| 在线观看www视频免费| 欧美成人午夜精品| 欧美 日韩 精品 国产| av在线老鸭窝| 在线观看免费视频网站a站| 99精品欧美一区二区三区四区| videosex国产| 国产有黄有色有爽视频| a级毛片在线看网站| 香蕉国产在线看| 亚洲免费av在线视频| 亚洲avbb在线观看| av在线播放精品| 成人影院久久| 丁香六月欧美| 水蜜桃什么品种好| 国产高清视频在线播放一区 | 国产成人av教育| 欧美另类亚洲清纯唯美| 两个人看的免费小视频| 美女福利国产在线| 黄色视频在线播放观看不卡| 建设人人有责人人尽责人人享有的| 欧美 日韩 精品 国产| 欧美老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 中文字幕人妻丝袜制服| 亚洲精华国产精华精| 国产欧美日韩综合在线一区二区| 各种免费的搞黄视频| 欧美国产精品一级二级三级| 我的亚洲天堂| 午夜福利影视在线免费观看| 飞空精品影院首页| tube8黄色片| 久久中文看片网| 久久中文字幕一级| 欧美成狂野欧美在线观看| av片东京热男人的天堂| 自拍欧美九色日韩亚洲蝌蚪91| 欧美久久黑人一区二区| 国产亚洲精品一区二区www | 男女边摸边吃奶| 首页视频小说图片口味搜索| 久久久国产一区二区| 亚洲avbb在线观看| 狂野欧美激情性xxxx| 日韩中文字幕视频在线看片| www.精华液| 精品熟女少妇八av免费久了| 99香蕉大伊视频| 免费高清在线观看视频在线观看| 精品一区在线观看国产| 国产高清国产精品国产三级| 国产1区2区3区精品| 黄色视频在线播放观看不卡| 老熟妇仑乱视频hdxx| 黑人猛操日本美女一级片| 欧美精品人与动牲交sv欧美| 欧美成狂野欧美在线观看| 成人三级做爰电影| av国产精品久久久久影院| 女性被躁到高潮视频| 国产精品国产三级国产专区5o| 亚洲全国av大片| 久热这里只有精品99| 免费观看人在逋| 中文欧美无线码| 国产av又大| 丰满人妻熟妇乱又伦精品不卡| 日韩免费高清中文字幕av| 亚洲国产欧美日韩在线播放| 久久精品aⅴ一区二区三区四区| 国产精品九九99| 18在线观看网站| 欧美一级毛片孕妇| 精品国内亚洲2022精品成人 | 悠悠久久av| 国产精品香港三级国产av潘金莲| 精品人妻熟女毛片av久久网站| 日韩大码丰满熟妇| 菩萨蛮人人尽说江南好唐韦庄| 人人妻人人添人人爽欧美一区卜| 成年人午夜在线观看视频| 999久久久国产精品视频| 国产一卡二卡三卡精品| 午夜福利免费观看在线| 亚洲七黄色美女视频| 国产极品粉嫩免费观看在线| 制服人妻中文乱码| 欧美激情久久久久久爽电影 | 国产麻豆69| 看免费av毛片| 777久久人妻少妇嫩草av网站| 久久精品国产a三级三级三级| 高清视频免费观看一区二区| 香蕉丝袜av| 菩萨蛮人人尽说江南好唐韦庄| 啦啦啦中文免费视频观看日本| 另类精品久久| kizo精华| 亚洲av日韩在线播放| 少妇人妻久久综合中文| 亚洲欧美日韩高清在线视频 | 丝袜脚勾引网站| 欧美av亚洲av综合av国产av| 国产男女超爽视频在线观看| 亚洲人成电影观看| 一级片'在线观看视频| 久久精品国产综合久久久| 亚洲精品第二区| 精品一区二区三卡| 一个人免费在线观看的高清视频 | 国产成人啪精品午夜网站| av不卡在线播放| 国产精品麻豆人妻色哟哟久久| 国产精品自产拍在线观看55亚洲 | 中文字幕制服av| 亚洲精品美女久久久久99蜜臀| 欧美亚洲 丝袜 人妻 在线| 国产片内射在线| 欧美激情久久久久久爽电影 | 日韩一卡2卡3卡4卡2021年| 色播在线永久视频| 亚洲精品国产区一区二| 亚洲视频免费观看视频| 午夜福利在线观看吧| 国产激情久久老熟女| 下体分泌物呈黄色| 国产日韩欧美亚洲二区| 一本一本久久a久久精品综合妖精| 国产黄频视频在线观看| 丰满人妻熟妇乱又伦精品不卡| 久久精品亚洲熟妇少妇任你| 涩涩av久久男人的天堂| 日韩视频一区二区在线观看| 一区二区av电影网| 国产99久久九九免费精品| 亚洲精品中文字幕在线视频| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区| 日本一区二区免费在线视频| 欧美日韩av久久| 欧美黑人欧美精品刺激| a在线观看视频网站| 国产激情久久老熟女| 99久久综合免费| 日韩欧美国产一区二区入口| 久久天堂一区二区三区四区| 满18在线观看网站| 欧美黄色淫秽网站| 欧美日韩国产mv在线观看视频| 久久精品aⅴ一区二区三区四区| 久久国产精品大桥未久av| 午夜老司机福利片| 91九色精品人成在线观看| 99国产精品一区二区三区| 精品国产一区二区三区四区第35| 男女之事视频高清在线观看| 欧美一级毛片孕妇| 黄色视频在线播放观看不卡| 亚洲,欧美精品.| 免费看十八禁软件| 最新在线观看一区二区三区| 大片免费播放器 马上看| 国产在线一区二区三区精| 人人妻人人澡人人爽人人夜夜| 老司机午夜十八禁免费视频| 丰满少妇做爰视频| 国产xxxxx性猛交| 久久久久精品人妻al黑| 99香蕉大伊视频| 亚洲精品av麻豆狂野| 嫩草影视91久久| 亚洲性夜色夜夜综合| 99久久精品国产亚洲精品| 99久久99久久久精品蜜桃| 国产成人系列免费观看| 国产精品av久久久久免费| 久久久国产一区二区| 美女国产高潮福利片在线看| 男女无遮挡免费网站观看| 欧美亚洲 丝袜 人妻 在线| 久久综合国产亚洲精品| www.自偷自拍.com| 国产有黄有色有爽视频| 一本—道久久a久久精品蜜桃钙片| 美女国产高潮福利片在线看| 午夜福利乱码中文字幕| 后天国语完整版免费观看| 亚洲专区字幕在线| 人人妻,人人澡人人爽秒播| 狠狠婷婷综合久久久久久88av| 国产男女内射视频| 国产视频一区二区在线看| 国产一区二区激情短视频 | 午夜福利视频精品| 精品人妻一区二区三区麻豆| 久久中文字幕一级| 亚洲国产欧美在线一区| 久久人人爽人人片av| 欧美黑人欧美精品刺激| 极品人妻少妇av视频| 国产精品久久久久成人av| 国产淫语在线视频| 日韩大码丰满熟妇| 啦啦啦在线免费观看视频4| 国产精品久久久av美女十八| 国产黄色免费在线视频| 久久久久久久精品精品| 日本91视频免费播放| 中国美女看黄片| 亚洲情色 制服丝袜| 亚洲av成人不卡在线观看播放网 | 黄片播放在线免费| 女人被躁到高潮嗷嗷叫费观| 国产精品麻豆人妻色哟哟久久| 热99久久久久精品小说推荐| 中文欧美无线码| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜添小说| 新久久久久国产一级毛片| 亚洲av日韩在线播放| 久久久精品94久久精品| 欧美日韩亚洲高清精品| 99精国产麻豆久久婷婷| 国产欧美日韩综合在线一区二区| 国产免费视频播放在线视频| 午夜福利视频在线观看免费| 91国产中文字幕| 五月天丁香电影| 中文字幕人妻丝袜一区二区| 亚洲伊人久久精品综合| 国产精品久久久久成人av| 欧美黑人精品巨大| 又大又爽又粗| 亚洲精品久久午夜乱码| 自线自在国产av| 母亲3免费完整高清在线观看| av国产精品久久久久影院| 乱人伦中国视频| 51午夜福利影视在线观看| 成人18禁高潮啪啪吃奶动态图| 婷婷色av中文字幕| 性高湖久久久久久久久免费观看| 亚洲精品乱久久久久久| 黑人巨大精品欧美一区二区mp4| 美女脱内裤让男人舔精品视频| 美女扒开内裤让男人捅视频| 久久国产精品影院| 欧美日本中文国产一区发布| 日韩中文字幕视频在线看片| 亚洲欧美精品综合一区二区三区| 久久亚洲国产成人精品v| 亚洲av男天堂| 久热爱精品视频在线9| 免费女性裸体啪啪无遮挡网站| 美女扒开内裤让男人捅视频| 精品亚洲成a人片在线观看| tocl精华| 精品卡一卡二卡四卡免费| 在线永久观看黄色视频| 免费在线观看黄色视频的| 九色亚洲精品在线播放| 亚洲中文av在线| 麻豆国产av国片精品| 天堂8中文在线网| av在线老鸭窝| 欧美日韩亚洲综合一区二区三区_| 日韩大片免费观看网站| 少妇粗大呻吟视频| 免费看十八禁软件| 国产成人a∨麻豆精品| 国产av一区二区精品久久| 欧美黄色淫秽网站| 国产精品亚洲av一区麻豆| 女人高潮潮喷娇喘18禁视频| 成人国语在线视频| 无遮挡黄片免费观看| 极品人妻少妇av视频| 婷婷色av中文字幕| 1024视频免费在线观看| 两性午夜刺激爽爽歪歪视频在线观看 | 免费少妇av软件| 在线观看免费午夜福利视频| 久久国产精品影院| 免费女性裸体啪啪无遮挡网站| 久久久久久久精品精品| 国产精品国产av在线观看| 亚洲精品乱久久久久久| av电影中文网址| 日韩视频一区二区在线观看| 人人妻人人添人人爽欧美一区卜| 亚洲国产看品久久| 日本vs欧美在线观看视频| 超碰97精品在线观看| 老鸭窝网址在线观看| 中文字幕精品免费在线观看视频| 国产在线免费精品| 国产人伦9x9x在线观看| 啦啦啦免费观看视频1| bbb黄色大片| 中文字幕制服av| 91国产中文字幕| 97精品久久久久久久久久精品| 亚洲性夜色夜夜综合| 日本av手机在线免费观看| 日韩欧美一区二区三区在线观看 | 人妻人人澡人人爽人人| 一二三四社区在线视频社区8| 久久久精品94久久精品| 国产又爽黄色视频| 午夜老司机福利片| 激情视频va一区二区三区| 久久久久久久久久久久大奶| 美国免费a级毛片| 捣出白浆h1v1| 黑人欧美特级aaaaaa片| 欧美97在线视频| 在线av久久热| 亚洲av成人不卡在线观看播放网 | 欧美精品亚洲一区二区| 国产伦人伦偷精品视频| 国产成人a∨麻豆精品| 捣出白浆h1v1| 看免费av毛片| 亚洲精品一二三| av天堂久久9| 少妇被粗大的猛进出69影院| 午夜激情久久久久久久| 国产在线一区二区三区精| 麻豆国产av国片精品| 精品少妇一区二区三区视频日本电影| 国内毛片毛片毛片毛片毛片| 亚洲av片天天在线观看| 精品人妻熟女毛片av久久网站| 久久久久精品国产欧美久久久 | 99国产综合亚洲精品| 男男h啪啪无遮挡| 久久久久精品人妻al黑| 精品少妇久久久久久888优播| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 成年女人毛片免费观看观看9 | 一区福利在线观看| 成年女人毛片免费观看观看9 | 国产av精品麻豆| 窝窝影院91人妻| videosex国产| 国产免费视频播放在线视频| 捣出白浆h1v1| 亚洲精品av麻豆狂野| 亚洲国产日韩一区二区| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜添小说| 精品少妇黑人巨大在线播放| 精品一区二区三区av网在线观看 | 另类精品久久| 大香蕉久久成人网| 国产在视频线精品| 少妇裸体淫交视频免费看高清 | 久久天堂一区二区三区四区| 一级毛片电影观看| 久久国产精品男人的天堂亚洲| 亚洲精品乱久久久久久| 国产日韩欧美亚洲二区| 18禁裸乳无遮挡动漫免费视频| av在线老鸭窝| 熟女少妇亚洲综合色aaa.| 青春草视频在线免费观看| 婷婷丁香在线五月| 免费少妇av软件| 爱豆传媒免费全集在线观看| 一个人免费看片子| 大码成人一级视频| 亚洲成人免费av在线播放| 久久久久久亚洲精品国产蜜桃av| 天天躁狠狠躁夜夜躁狠狠躁| 老司机福利观看| 欧美97在线视频| 男女高潮啪啪啪动态图| 久久精品熟女亚洲av麻豆精品| 国产亚洲欧美精品永久| 另类亚洲欧美激情| 久久午夜综合久久蜜桃| 国产91精品成人一区二区三区 | 亚洲av电影在线观看一区二区三区|