The obtained results emphasized the emergence of highly resistant bacteria to most of tested antimicrobials and raise the alarm for physicians to change their treatment pattern depending on antimicrobial susceptibility results.

BackgroundNucleic acid amplification assays allow for the rapid and accurate detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) directly in clinical specimens thereby facilitating diagnosis of tuberculosis (TB). With the fully automated Xpert MTB/RIF system (Cepheid) an innovative solution of TB diagnostics has been launched. We performed a direct head-to-head comparison of Xpert MTB/RIF with two widely used commercial assays, ProbeTec ET DTB (DTB) (Becton-Dickinson) and COBAS TaqMan MTB (CTM-MTB) (Roche).Methods121 pre-characterized respiratory specimens (68 culture-positive for MTB complex, 24 culture-positive for non-tuberculous mycobacteria and 29 culture-negative) taken from our frozen specimen bank were tested for the presence of MTB complex by the three assays.ResultsAmong culture-positive samples (n = 68), overall sensitivity for detection of MTB complex was 74.6%, 73.8%, and 79.1% for Xpert MTB/RIF, CTM-MTB, and DTB, respectively. Within the subgroup of smear-negative TB samples (n = 51) sensitivity was 68% for Xpert MTB/RIF and CTM-MTB and 72% for DTB. Among smear-positive TB samples (n = 17), all (100%) were detected by DTB and 94.1% and 93.3% by Xpert MTB/RIF and CTM-MTB, respectively. Specificity was best for CTM-MTB (100%) and lowest for Xpert MTB/RIF (96.2%) due to misidentification of two NTM samples as MTB complex. CTM-MTB yielded the highest rate of invalid results (4.1%) (0.8% by Xpert MTB/RIF and DTB, respectively).ConclusionsThe direct comparison of Xpert MTB/RIF with CTM-MTB and DTB yielded similar overall performance data. Whereas DTB was slightly superior to Xpert MTB/RIF in terms of sensitivity, at least in the sample collection tested here, CTM-MTB performed best in terms of specificity.

The rapid spread of COVID-19, which has led to a global pandemic, has placed public health systems under severe pressure. Identifying variations in SARS-CoV-2 strains from different regions is a key factor for understanding the pathogenic mechanisms, aid in diagnosis, prevention and therapy of this disease. The present study is an analytical descriptive study aimed to determine genetic variations among SARS-CoV-2 strains isolated in China. Sixty six complete genome sequences of the virus were retrieved from NCBI, the sequence of original Wuhan strain accession number NC 045512 was used as the reference sequence. Each genome sequence was blasted against the original Wuhan strain; the analysis was done using NCBI Nucleo-blast. The collected sequences showed 10 different variants. One hundred and thirty four mutations were identified among the variants of SARS-CoV-2 in this study; most of them 52.2% (70/134) were missense point mutation, majority of the mutations 65.7% (88/134) occurred in the open reading frame a/b (ORFab), few mutations occurred in the structural viral genome, each of spike (S) gene and nucleocapsid (N) gene showed 4 mutations; 2 silent point mutations and 2 missense point mutations occurred in each gene whereas membrane (M) gene showed silent point mutation and no mutation observed in the envelope E gene. The remarkable observation in this study showed by Yunnan variant accession number MT226610 which exhibited high incidence of mutations, it displayed 28 different point mutations; only 3(10.7%) of them were silent mutations while the rest were missense mutations. Our analysis showed several mutations including spike S gene and membrane M gene which may be responsible for a change in the structures of target proteins.