Evidence Hub

A Systematic Review on the Occurrence of Antimicrobial-Resistant Escherichia coli in Poultry and Poultry Environments in Bangladesh between 2010 and 2021

Islam MS, Hossain MJ, Sobur MA, Punom SA, Rahman AMMT, Rahman MT

BioMed research international, 2023

53 citations

Abstract

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a significant public health issue in Bangladesh like many other developing countries where data on resistance trends are scarce. Moreover, the existence of multidrug-resistant (MDR) Escherichia coli exerts an ominous effect on the poultry sector. Therefore, the current systematic review, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, was conducted to find out the AMR scenarios in E. coli isolates sourced from poultry and poultry environments in Bangladesh between 2010 and 2021. Following the PRISMA guidelines, a total of 17 published scientific articles were selected for this systematic review. This review revealed that 18 out of 64 districts in Bangladesh reported E. coli in poultry, having a higher prevalence (combined prevalence: 69.3%, 95% confidence interval, CI: 67.3-71%). Moreover, the prevalence ranged from 24.3% to 100%. This review found that E. coli isolates showed resistance to 14 antimicrobial classes and 45 different antimicrobial agents, including the last-line (reserve group) antibiotics and banned antimicrobial categories for the treatment of infections in agricultural animals. Phenotypic resistance of E. coli against penicillins and beta-lactamase inhibitors (20.2%-100%), cephalosporins (1.9%-100%), fluoroquinolones (5.98%-100%), aminoglycosides (6%-100%), tetracyclines (17.7%-100%), carbapenems (13.6%-72.7%), macrolides (11.8%-100%), polymyxins (7.9%-100%), phenicols…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in animal, not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free