Background: Community-acquired urinary tract infections are associated with significant morbidity, and uropathogenic Escherichia coli (UPEC) alone causes 90% of urinary tract infections. This bacterium retains a diverse armament of virulence factors including fimbria, hemolysins, and siderophores production. In a post invasion scenario, formation of intracellular communities mimic biofilm-like characteristics and are linked to recurrent urinary tract infections. We investigated the effects of different frontline antibiotics on the formation, inhibition, and eradication of biofilms of virulent UPEC strains. Materials and Methods: A total of 155 UPEC strains were scrutinized for various virulence factors including gelatinase, cell surface hydrophobicity, hemagglutination, and serum bactericidal activity. Biofilm formation was confirmed by three different methods: Congo red agar, test tube, and tissue culture plate method. Biofilm inhibition and eradication assays were performed according to the standard protocols. Topographical analysis of biofilms was done by scanning electronic microscopy (SEM). Results: Out of 155 strains, 113 (73%) were strong biofilm formesr, while 37 (24%) produced biofilms at moderate level. Significant differences were observed between MICs of planktonic cells (MIC-p) and MICs of UPEC biofilms (MIC-b). Among tested frontline antibiotics, levofloxacin successfully inhibited biofilms at a concentration of 32 µg/mL, while trimethoprim eradicated biofilms at higher concentrations (512-1024 µg/mL). Ciprofloxacin treatment at sub-MIC level significantly enhanced biofilm formation (P<0.05). Conclusion: The majority of UPEC strains are strong biofilm formers and show higher tolerance towards frontline antibiotics in biofilm form. We observed significant inhibitory effects of levofloxacin (32 µg/mL) on UPEC biofilms, while treatment with sub-minimal concentrations of ciprofloxacin significantly enhanced biofilm formation. Out of all tested antibiotics, trimethoprim (512-1024 µg/mL) eradicated UPEC biofilms.

Staphylococcus aureus is a notorious Gram-positive, non-spore-forming, opportunistic bacterium that causes a variety of infections including bacteremia, endocarditis, pneumonia, skin and soft tissue infections, and several others. Also, the overuse and misuse of drugs attributed to the crises of multidrug resistance especially in MRSA. Objective: Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine the prevalence rate of MRSA, antimicrobial susceptibility profiles of S. aureus, MRSA, and MSSA isolates to a variety of commonly used antibiotics, and its multidrug resistant patterns. Methods: Samples were collected from the microbiology department of HMC Peshawar, Pakistan. Antibiotic susceptibility patterns were determined under CLSI and EUCAST guideline, 2021 by following the Kirby-Bauer disc diffusion method. Results: Out of 106 S. aureus clinical isolates, 83 (78.3%) isolates were identified as MRSA and 23 (21.7%) were MSSA. In MRSA high resistance was exhibited to Penicillin G and cefoxitin (100%), followed by erythromycin 84.34% and ciprofloxacin 79.52%. Meanwhile low resistance was observed to doxycycline 19.28% followed by chloramphenicol 14.46%, teicoplanin and linezolid 2.41% for each respectively. High sensitivity in MRSA isolates was exhibited to linezolid 97.59% followed by teicoplanin 95.18%, chloramphenicol 85.54%, doxycycline 80.72% and fusidic acid 74.70%. A total of n=94 (88.67%) isolates were characterized as MDR. Conclusions: In conclusion, the most effective antibiotics used to treat S. aureus infections were linezolid, teicoplanin, chloramphenicol, doxycycline, fusidic acid, and gentamycin. In addition, the current study also noticed a significant prevalence of resistance to several antibiotics, emphasizing the importance of antibiotic usage monitoring.

Towards the end of 2019 a novel virus, severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), responsible for acute respiratory syndrome emerged from the city of Wuhan, China globally. World Health Organization declared in March 2020 that the SARS-Cov-2 virus is a global pandemic issue. Corona virus spread from an infected person to others through droplets released during coughing and sneezing and through zoonotic sources, which are still under investigation. The government of Pakistan has announced the Nation Action Plan (NAP) to combat the corona virus pandemic. Implementation of preventive measures in hospitals to minimize the spread of disease. Corona virus needs biosafety level II conditions and Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) which is accountable as the valuable diagnostic tool and the various lab assays for SARS-CoV-2 confirmation are required. Moreover, basic preventive measurements including hand washing, use of face masks, keeping the social distance from suspected patients, and avoiding unnecessary traveling to overcrowded areas, and quarantine of 14 days for infected persons. The disinfectants used are Sodium hypochlorite solution (bleach) and ethanol and proper discarding protocols for the contaminated materials. People with obvious symptoms of COVID-19 couldn’t be tested. The security of these centers is also not strictly managed. People continued to escape from there and wander in local areas and markets and put the lives of healthy people in danger. The developing countries including Pakistan are at high risk. Personal and community-based strategy and public awareness are required to face any serious consequences in Pakistan from this pandemic disaster. In this review particularly we are focusing on the corona virus diagnosis, hospital management, and its comparison with the developed countries.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) became a pandemic by the start of 2020. Mortalities went on rise due to lack of understanding of disease as the symptoms varied from population to population and even within the same population. Furthermore, there were lack of facilities in hospitals to accommodate the patients as well as to treat them. Pakistan is no exception and the situation here was also worsened. Government of Pakistan started to take emergency steps and devised new policies to provide facilities to patients regarding quarantine and treatment. In this review, there is an overview of Province-wise situation in Pakistan regarding the hospitals and facilities for COVID-19 patients. Flaws in the system and a comparison with world is also discussed.