METHODS: A search was conducted in PubMed, Science Direct, and Google Scholar databases to identify eligible studies. Studies that reported the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (CRAB), carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE), extended-spectrum beta-lactamase inhibitor (ESBL)-producing Enterobacteriaceae, vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE), methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (CPE) were selected. Studies published in English language from the start of COVID-19 pandemic to July 2022 were considered for inclusion.
RESULTS: Thirty eligible studies were selected and most of them were from Italy (n = 8), Turkey (n = 3) and Brazil (n = 3). The results indicated changes in the rate of multidrug resistant bacteria, and the changes varied between the studies. Most studies (54.5%) reported increase in MRSA infection/colonization during the pandemic, and the increase ranged from 4.6 to 170.6%. Five studies (55.6%) reported a 6.8-65.1% increase in VRE infection/colonization during the pandemic. A 2.4-58.2% decrease in ESBL E. coli and a 1.8-13.3% reduction in ESBL Klebsiella pneumoniae was observed during the pandemic. For CRAB, most studies (58.3%) reported 1.5-621.6% increase in infection/colonization during the pandemic. Overall, studies showed increase in the rate of CRE infection/colonization during the pandemic. There was a reduction in carbapenem-resistant E. coli during COVID-19 pandemic, and an increase in carbapenem-resistant K. pneumoniae. Most studies (55.6%) showed 10.4 - 40.9% reduction in the rate of CRPA infection during the pandemic.
CONCLUSION: There is an increase in the rate of multidrug resistant gram positive and gram negative bacteria during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the rate of ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae and CRPA has decrease during the pandemic. Both infection prevention and control strategies and antimicrobial stewardship should be strengthen to address the increasing rate of multidrug resistant gram positive and gram negative bacteria.
AIM: In this study, maceration and Soxhlet extraction of the whole plant of Cassia alata Linn. (leaves, roots, and stem) were performed using four solvents with different polarities, namely n-hexane, ethyl acetate, ethanol and distilled water. The crude extracts were screened using agar well diffusion, colorimetric broth microdilution, grid culture and bacterial growth curve analysis against Staphylococcus aureus. The phytochemicals in the crude extracts were identified using Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS).
RESULTS: Agar-well diffusion analysis revealed that extraction using ethyl acetate showed the largest inhibition zone with an average diameter of 15.30 mm (root Soxhlet extract) followed by 14.70 mm (leaf Soxhlet extract) and 13.70 mm (root maceration extract). The lowest minimum inhibitory and minimum bactericidal concentration in root Soxhlet extract using ethyl acetate was 0.313 and 0.625 µg µL-1, respectively. Our study proved that crude extract of the plant suppressed the growth of S. aureus as evidenced from a significant regression extension (p anti-inflammatory activities.
CONCLUSION: Ethyl acetate crude extract was better than the other investigated solvents. The root and stem of C. alata showed significant antimicrobial efficacy against S. aureus in this study. The remaining 56 out of 88 phytochemicals of the plant should be intensively studied for more medicinal uses.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three hundred and four isolates of E. coli and Klebsiella sp. had been selected via convenient sampling. These isolates were identified using conventional laboratory methods and their antimicrobial susceptibilities were determined using disc diffusion method. Those isolates were then proceeded with ESBL confirmatory test, cloxacillin-containing Muller Hinton confirmatory test, modified double disk synergy test and AmpC disk test.
RESULTS: Out of 304 isolates, 159 isolates were E. coli and 145 were Klebsiella sp. The prevalence of organisms which co-produced AmpC β-lactamase and ESBL enzymes were 3.0%. Besides that, 39 cefoxitin resistant and three cefoxitin susceptible isolates (13.8%) were proven to produce AmpC β-lactamase through AmpC disk test. Through the CLSI confirmatory test, 252 (82.9%) isolates were identified as ESBLs producers and the prevalence increased slightly when cloxacillin-containing Muller Hinton were used. Only three ESBLs positive organisms were positive for modified double disk synergy test.
CONCLUSION: Distinguishing between AmpC β-lactamase and ESBL-producing organisms has epidemiological significance as well as therapeutic importance. Moreover, AmpC β-lactamase and ESBLs co-producing organisms can lead to false negative ESBL confirmatory test. Therefore, knowing the local prevalence can guide the clinician in navigating the treatment.
METHODS: Prospective, multicenter, international registry on the management of H. pylori (European Registry on H. pylori Management). All infected and culture-diagnosed adult patients registered in the Spanish Association of Gastroenterology-Research Electronic Data Capture from 2013 to 2021 were included.
RESULTS: A total of 2,852 naive patients with culture results were analyzed. Resistance to clarithromycin, metronidazole, and quinolones was 22%, 27%, and 18%, respectively. The most effective treatment, regardless of resistance, were the 3-in-1 single capsule with bismuth, metronidazole, and tetracycline (91%) and the quadruple with bismuth, offering optimal cure rates even in the presence of bacterial resistance to clarithromycin or metronidazole. The concomitant regimen with tinidazole achieved an eradication rate of 99% (90/91) vs 84% (90/107) with metronidazole. Triple schedules, sequential, or concomitant regimen with metronidazole did not achieve optimal results. A total of 1,118 non-naive patients were analyzed. Resistance to clarithromycin, metronidazole, and quinolones was 49%, 41%, and 24%, respectively. The 3-in-1 single capsule (87%) and the triple therapy with levofloxacin (85%) were the only ones that provided encouraging results.
DISCUSSION: In regions where the antibiotic resistance rate of H. pylori is high, eradication treatment with the 3-in-1 single capsule, the quadruple with bismuth, and concomitant with tinidazole are the best options in naive patients. In non-naive patients, the 3-in-1 single capsule and the triple therapy with levofloxacin provided encouraging results.
METHODS: LB was extracted from Bacillus clausii isolate and the dry extract was diluted in deionized water. The antimicrobial effect of LB against planktonic E. faecalis was evaluated by determining the Minimal Inhibitory Concentration (MIC50). The anti-biofilm effect was evaluated by Minimal Biofilm Inhibitory Concentration (MBIC50) and Minimal Biofilm Eradication Concentration (MBEC50) assays on biofilm grown on dentin specimen surface. To evaluate the effectiveness of LB as a single irrigation solution and as a pre-irrigation prior to NaOCl, live and dead bacterial cells were quantified using Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy (CLSM), and cell biomass was assessed.
RESULTS: LB exhibited an MIC50 and MBIC50 of 100 ppm, with an MBEC50 of 1000 ppm, resulting in 52.94 % biofilm inhibition and 60.95 % biofilm eradication on dentin specimens. The effectiveness was concentration-dependent, at 500 ppm, LB demonstrated comparable antimicrobial efficacy to 2.5 % NaOCl. Pre-irrigation with LB resulted in lower biofilm biomass compared to NaOCl alone.
CONCLUSION: Pre-irrigation with LB enhanced the antimicrobial effect when followed by NaOCl irrigation. Consequently, LB shows promise as both a standalone root canal irrigation solution and as an adjunct to NaOCl in root canal treatment.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The study highlights the potential of Lipopeptide Biosurfactant (LB) as an environmentally friendly irrigation solution for root canal treatment, demonstrating potent antimicrobial and anti-biofilm properties against Enterococcus faecalis. LB exhibits concentration-dependent efficacy comparable to 2.5 % NaOCl and can be used as a standalone irrigation solution or in conjunction with NaOCl.