Identification and characterization of thermophilic amylase producing bacterial isolates from the brick kiln soil.

The present experiment was designed to isolate bacterial strains from the brick kiln soil and to check the activity and enzyme kinetics of amylase from these isolates. The bacterial colonies were isolated from soil samples through the serial dilution method. The bacterial isolates were identified through morphological, electron microscopic and molecular analysis. The 16S ribosomal RNA sequences of the isolates IR-1, IR-2, IR-3, IR-8, and IR-9 showed high similarities with Bacillus tequilensis, Bacillus paramycoides, Proteus alimentorum, Bacillus wiedmannii, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, respectively. All of the bacterial isolates showed a positive catalase activity except IR-9. Furthermore, the isolates showed variable antagonistic effects against different bacterial pathogens. All of the strains produced indole acetic acid (IAA), and the concentrations increased in the presence of tryptophan application. The isolates showed the amylase enzyme activity and maximum activity of isolates was achieved in 4% starch concentration. The IR-9 isolate showed the highest amylase activity of 5.9 U/ml. The V max values of the extracellular amylase from different bacterial isolates ranged between 12.90 and 50.00 IU ml-1. The lowest K m value of 6.33 mg starch was recorded for IR-8 and the maximum K cat value of 2.50 min-1 was observed for IR-3. The amylase activity of the isolates was significantly affected by a range of different incubation time, temperature, and pH values. Further tests are required before the potential utilization of these isolates for amylase production, and in the biopesticide and biofertilizer applications.

Magnetic resonance guided focused ultrasound for treatment of bone tumors.

AIMS: Magnetic resonance guided focused ultrasound (MRgFUS) is a new modality in the management of primary and secondary bone tumors. We aimed to investigate the safety, efficacy, and feasibility of using MRgFUS for the treatment of (1) benign bone tumors with the intent of complete tumor ablation, (2) primary malignant bone tumors with the intent to assess its effectiveness in causing tumor necrosis, and (3) metastatic bone disease with the intent of pain relief. METHOD: Twenty-four patients with benign bone tumors, primary malignant bone tumors, and metastatic bone disease were treated with one session of MRgFUS. Contrast-enhanced (CE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was carried out post-procedure to assess and quantify the area of ablation. Those with malignant primary tumors had the tumors resected 2 weeks after the treatment and the ablated areas were examined histopathologically (HPE). The other patients were followed up for 3 months to assess for the side effects and pain scores. RESULTS: Significant volume of ablation was noted on CE MRI after the treatment. Benign bone tumors were ablated with minimal adverse effects. Metastatic bone disease was successfully treated with significant decrease in pain scores. Ablated primary malignant tumors showed significant coagulative necrosis on MRI and the HPE showed 100% necrosis. Pain scores significantly decreased 3 months after the procedure. Only two patients had superficial skin blistering and three patients had increase in pain scores immediately after treatment. CONCLUSION: MRgFUS is effective, safe, and noninvasive procedure that can be an adjunct in the management of primary and metastatic bone tumors.

ARE WE TELLING THE DIABETIC PATIENTS ADEQUATELY ABOUT FOOT CARE?.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus affects more than 285 million people worldwide. The prevalenceis expected to rise to 439 million by the year 2030. Diabetic foot ulcers precede 84% of non-traumatic amputations in diabetics. One lower limb is lost every 30 seconds around the worldbecause of diabetic foot ulceration. Apart from being lengthy, the treatment of diabetic foot is alsovery expensive. There is very limited emphasis on foot care in diabetic patients. Even indeveloped countries patients feel that they do not have adequate knowledge about foot care. Thisstudy was conducted to find out how much information is imparted by doctors to diabetic patientsabout foot care. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted in admitted patients of theDepartment of Medicine, DHQ Hospital, Abbottabad from May 2014 to June 2015. One hundredand thirt-nine diabetic patients more than 25 years of age were included by non-probability consecutive sampling. RESULTS: The mean age was 57.17 (±11.1) years. 35.3% of patients weremale and 64.7% were female. The mean duration of diabetes in patients was 8.3 (±6) years. Only36.7% of patients said that their doctor told them about foot care. Less than 40% of patients knewthat they should daily inspect their feet, wash them with gentle warm water, and dry themafterwards. Only 25.2% of the participants knew how to manage corns or calluses on feet. 66.5%of patients knew that they should not walk bare foot. Overall, 63% of our patients had less than50% knowledge of the 11 points regarding foot care that the investigators asked them. CONCLUSION: Diabetic foot problems are the one of the costliest, most disabling and dishearteningcomplication of diabetes mellitus. Doctors are not properly telling diabetic patients about footcare. There is a deficiency of knowledge among the diabetic patients regarding foot care.