Multidrug-resistant (MDR) Acinetobacter baumannii infections are a great public health concern and demand continuous surveillance and antibiotic stewardship. Virulence traits and the pathogenicity of Acinetobacter are less studied compared with the molecular epidemiological and antibiotic resistance profile of this organism. In our present study, we investigated the primary characteristics contributing to the virulence of MDR A. baumannii isolates and compared them with avirulent isolates. A total of 32 well-characterized MDR A. baumannii clinical isolates and 22 avirulent isolates from a healthy individual were subjected to multilocus sequence typing and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for a variety of biofilm-associated genes. Additionally, a number of in vitro tests were performed to determine virulence properties. Isolates were found to relate to six sequence types (STs) in which the dominant sequence was ST557 in clinical isolates, followed by ST195 and ST208. However, ST557 and ST222 were absent in avirulent isolates. All STs belonged to clonal complex 2 and clonal lineage 2, which is considered to be a universal clone. PCR analysis showed that most clinical isolates were positive for biofilm-forming genes, such as csu and bap, and also carried pga and ompA genes, which were less common in avirulent isolates. Biofilm formation, phospholipase C production, hemolytic activity, and acinetobactin production occurred significantly more frequently in clinical isolates compared with avirulent isolates. Though A. baumannii clonal lineages showed common virulence traits, they differed in virulent phenotype expression. These findings further support previous studies indicating that A. baumannii is a versatile pathogen with an ability to acquire iron and survive in iron-limiting conditions, highlighting the acinetobactin-mediated iron acquisition mechanisms involved in the pathogenesis of A. baumannii infections.

Distalization is a conservative method that is utilized in orthodontics to gain space by moving posterior teeth distally. It may be combined with other space gaining strategies, such as expansion, or can be used alone. Many methods have been used for distalization. These methods differ significantly in their place, whether to be extraoral or intraoral, site of action in upper and/or lower arch, and cooperation needed by the patient if it is removable or fixed. This review illustrates some of the most commonly used methods for distalization with a brief presentation of three cases that incorporated successful distalization techniques.

No abstract