Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are most often caused by Gram-negative bacteria, with Escherichia coli typically predominating. Rising antimicrobial resistance (AMR) among uropathogens — including resistance to penicillins, cephalosporins and fluoroquinolones — complicates empirical therapy. This retrospective study aimed to describe the bacteriological profile and antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of uropathogens isolated at Chhatrapati Shivaji Subharti Hospital, Meerut, and to develop an institutional antibiogram to support empirical prescribing and antibiotic stewardship.
The investigators analysed 50 culture-positive urine samples collected between July 2025 and December 2025. Organism identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing were performed using standard laboratory methods: disc diffusion and an automated Biomerieux Vitek 2 Compact instrument. The study used descriptive statistics and Fisher’s exact test for analysis. The authors report that data and isolates originated from both inpatient and outpatient settings; 74% of isolates were from inpatients. Ethical approval was obtained from the University Ethics Committee (Medical) of Swami Vivekanand Subharti University (Reference No: SMC/UECM/2025/.11.6.8).
Of the 50 culture-positive urine samples, 80.0% (40/50) were Gram-negative bacteria. The distribution of isolates was:
Overall, 37 of 50 isolates (74.0%) were reported as derived from inpatient samples.
E. coli isolates demonstrated high levels of resistance across multiple drug classes. Reported resistance rates included 100% resistance to ampicillin and ceftriaxone, 95.7% resistance to ciprofloxacin and cefepime, and 73.9% resistance to meropenem. The authors identified fosfomycin (86.4% sensitive) and colistin (69.6% sensitive) as the only antimicrobials with notable retained activity against E. coli in this dataset.
K. pneumoniae isolates showed uniformly high resistance to several commonly used agents: 100% resistance to ceftriaxone, amoxicillin–clavulanate and piperacillin–tazobactam. Reported carbapenem resistance among K. pneumoniae ranged from 83.3% to 91.7%. Colistin was the only agent reported as consistently effective, with 83.3% sensitivity.
Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Enterobacter cloacae were less frequent in this series; specific susceptibility percentages for these species beyond those provided for Enterobacteriaceae were not separately enumerated in the abstract.
Among the 35 Enterobacteriaceae isolates that were tested, Extended-Spectrum Beta-Lactamase (ESBL) positivity was reported as 100%. Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) positivity among these isolates was 85.0%. All bacterial isolates in the study met criteria for multi-drug resistance (MDR). The authors further report that 31 of the 35 tested Enterobacteriaceae isolates (88.6%) were copositive for ESBL and CRE.
Six Candida isolates were identified and, according to the report, demonstrated full sensitivity to all antifungal agents used in testing. The abstract does not list the specific antifungal agents or individual susceptibility percentages.
The study documents a high burden of resistance among uropathogens at the reporting tertiary care centre, with particularly notable findings of 100% ESBL positivity, 85% CRE positivity and universal MDR among bacterial isolates in this cohort. The authors present these findings as a baseline institutional antibiogram intended to inform empirical antibiotic choices and to support local antibiotic stewardship efforts at Chhatrapati Shivaji Subharti Hospital.
This report is a retrospective analysis of 50 culture-positive urine samples over a six-month period; the sample size is limited and the findings derive from a single tertiary centre. The document is a preprint and has not undergone peer review; the authors caution that the data should not be used alone to guide clinical practice. Ethical approval and patient consent procedures were reported: the study received institutional ethical approval and patient/participant consent was obtained and archived as described.
Note: The abstract provides percentages and summary susceptibility results; detailed methods, full susceptibility tables, statistical outputs and infection source breakdowns beyond those summarized in the abstract are contained in the full manuscript and supplementary material as indicated by the authors. The preprint status should be considered when interpreting findings.