According to the results of this study,
E. coli was the most common organism in both groups, which was in accordance with many studies in this field (
11-
15). The level of
E. coli was about 90% in both groups, however in the study of Mbanga et al. it was about 40.3% (
11). In the current study, bacterial resistance rates were lowest against Amikacin and Nitrofurantoine in both infant groups, although the rate in the bottle-fed group was 16 times higher than in the breastfed infants. Our results were somehow different those reported by Caracciolo et al. They concluded that the lowest resistance rate was against Ceftazidime, Ceftriaxone, Nitrofurantoine, and Gentamicin (
16), while in the current study, resistance against Ceftriaxone was high in the bottle-fed infants and below 5% in the breastfed group. Moreover, Senel et al. concluded that the lowest rates of bacterial resistance were against Imipenem, Amikacin, Netilmicin, and Ciprofloxacin (
13). By comparison, in our study, the rate of resistance against Amikacin in BrF infants was 1%, while in BoF infants was 11.8%.
Our results showed that bacterial resistance to common antibiotics was lower in breastfed infants than in bottle-fed infants. For further elaboration on
E. coli, it can be said that there are evidences, suggested a lower presence of
Enterobacteriaceae in the feces of breastfed infants compared to bottle-fed infants; in addition,
E. coli isolated from the feces of the breastfed infants had lower virulence factors (
10). Knowing that the infants in the current study were suffering from UTIs gave us the impression that the bacteria in our study were highly virulent. Researchers do not have any proof of why bacterial resistance is lower in breastfed infants, which shows the need for another study in order to compare the different characteristics of bacteria isolated from these two groups.