Detection of biofilm among uropathogenic Escherichia coli and its correlation with antibiotic resistance pattern

BACKGROUND:

Escherichia coli accounts for 70%–95% of urinary tract infections (UTIs). UTI is a serious health problem with respect to antibiotic resistance and biofilms formation being the prime cause for the antibiotic resistance. Biofilm can restrict the diffusion of substances and binding of antimicrobials. In this context, the present study is aimed to perform in vitro detection of biofilm formation among E. coli strains isolated from urine and to correlate their susceptibility pattern with biofilm formation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

A total of 100 E. coli strains isolated from patients suffering from UTI were included in the study. The identification of E. coli was performed by colony morphology, Gram staining, and standard biochemical tests. The detection of biofilm was carried out by Congo Red Agar (CRA) method, tube method (TM), and tissue culture plate (TCP) method. Antimicrobial sensitivity testing was performed by Kirby–Bauer disc diffusion method on Muller–Hinton agar plate.

RESULTS:

Of the 100 E. coli strains, 49 (49%) and 51 (51%) were from catheterized and noncatheterized patients, respectively. Biofilm production was positive by CRA, TM, and TCP method were 49 (49%), 55 (55%), and 69 (69%), respectively. Biofilm producers showed maximum resistance to co-trimoxazole (73.9%), gentamicin (94.2%), and imipenem (11.6%) when compared to nonbiofilm producers. Significant association was seen between resistance to antibiotic and biofilm formation with a P = 0.01 (<0.05).

CONCLUSION:

A greater understanding of biofilm detection in E. coli will help in the development of newer and more effective treatment. The detection of biofilm formation and antibiotic susceptibility pattern helps in choosing the correct antibiotic therapy.

Breakthrough Infections: Clinical Profile and Outcomes of COVID-19 Vaccinated and Unvaccinated People From a Tertiary Care Hospital

Introduction Despite the availability of a vaccine and extensive vaccination, breakthrough infections are commonly noted, which is jeopardizing the vaccine-based protection against COVID-19. The present study aims to evaluate COVID-19 breakthrough infections and to compare the clinical profile and outcomes of the vaccinated and unvaccinated populations.  Methods A retrospective observational study was conducted for two months (March-April 2021), and all cases reported during the study period were included in the study. Socio-demographic details, COVID-19 profiles, clinical outcomes, vaccination statuses, and types of vaccine were collected from the patients. Further, COVID-19-positive samples were screened for lineages using next-generation sequencing (NGS). Results Of the total 103 patients included in the study, 79 (76.7%) were symptomatic and 24 (23.3%) were asymptomatic. Only 32% were vaccinated and 68% were unvaccinated. 29.2% were hospitalized due to COVID-19 and all of them were unvaccinated. The mortality among hospitalized patients was extremely high (60%). The time to positivity after complete vaccination was noted to be 37.09±23.74 days. The unvaccinated study participants showed lower Cycle threshold (Ct) values (E Gene/N Gene: 17.38±4.53) as compared to the vaccinated people (E Gene/N Gene: 22±4.25). The Delta (B. 1.1. 629) (76.7%) was the predominant variant among the study population followed by AY.4 (20.4%) and Kappa (2.9%) variants. Conclusion Although the vaccination does not restrict/avoid infection, it appears to protect the vaccinated people from severe forms of COVID-19. Also, the higher Ct values among vaccinated people indicate that the viral load among such people may be lower and, therefore, minimizes viral transmission.

Evaluating the Status of Hepatitis B Vaccination in Healthcare Workers at a Central Laboratory in a Tertiary Care Hospital and Research Centre

Introduction Hepatitis B virus is a significant occupational hazard for healthcare workers worldwide. Long-term protection against hepatitis B infection is conferred by the vaccine and the protective immune response is indicated by anti-hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) titre. It is crucial to monitor anti-HBsAg titres as their levels decrease over time. The study aims to evaluate the status of hepatitis B vaccination among personnel working in the Central Laboratory of Shri B.M. Patil Medical College Hospital and Research Centre. The focus is on understanding the immunization practices and protection levels against HBV within this high-risk group. Materials and methods A cross-sectional analysis was conducted, including collecting demographic data, determining HBsAg status, evaluating anti-HBsAg titre value, and getting vaccination details of the laboratory personnel. The study participants included doctors, lab technicians, and attendants who were assessed for both vaccination coverage and immunity levels. After obtaining their written consent, 4 ml of blood was collected in sterile blood collection tubes. All the samples were tested for HBsAg. The negative samples were tested for anti-hepatitis B surface antigen antibody (HBsAg-Ab (IgG)) titre. The enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) method was used to evaluate the obtained samples for HBsAg and anti-HBsAg titre. Results A total of 99 healthcare workers were included in the study. Most of the laboratory healthcare workers were in the age range of 20-30 years. In 84.8% of the subjects, protective antibody levels (>10 IU/ml) were found. The highest protection was seen among doctors (94.5%), followed by lab technicians (82.9%) and attendants (66.6%). However, 15.2% exhibited inadequate immunity, predominantly among the attendants (33.3%). The highest vaccination coverage was among doctors (91.8%), followed by lab technicians (78.7%) and attendants (53.3%). Most doctors had completed the full vaccination schedule (70.2%) or received a booster dose (24.3%) compared to lab technicians (57.4%) and attendants (46.6%). Conclusion The study highlights effective preventive measures against HBV among laboratory healthcare workers, as indicated by the absence of active infections. But it also emphasizes the necessity of focused initiatives to raise vaccination rates, particularly among attendants, in order to guarantee complete protection against HBV for all levels of laboratory workers.

Comparative Analysis of Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay and Immunochromatography for Rotavirus and Adenovirus Detection in Children below Five Years with Acute Gastroenteritis

Introduction The most frequent etiologies of viral gastroenteritis among young children are rotavirus and enteric adenovirus. The clinical signs and symptoms of viral gastroenteritis are not distinct enough to allow for diagnosis. For the diagnosis and treatment of acute gastroenteritis, it is preferable to use quick, simple, and low-cost procedures. This study was undertaken to determine efficacy of immune-chromatography test (ICT) in comparison with enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) to detect rotavirus and adenovirus antigen in fecal specimen among children less than 5 years of age with acute gastroenteritis.

Materials and Methods In a cross-sectional observational study, 314 fecal samples were collected from children aged less than 5 years with acute gastroenteritis attending or admitted to a tertiary care hospital during the 1 year study period. Samples were tested for rotavirus and adenovirus antigen using ICT and ELISA.

Results Among the 314 children evaluated, 112 (35.66%) had rotavirus infection, nine (2.86%) had adenovirus infection, and three (0.95%) had both rotavirus and adenovirus infection. This study found that ICT is 98.20% sensitive and 100% specific for the diagnosis of rotaviral diarrhea and 100% sensitive and 99.7% specific for adenovirus diarrhea, compared to ELISA.

Conclusion Immunochromatography tests used for the detection of rotavirus and adenovirus in the fecal sample showed a high degree of sensitivity and specificity. The ICT is easy to perform and rapid, and it does not require any special equipment. Hence, the ICT could be used as an alternative method for detecting viral pathogens in clinical practice.