Premium
Analysis of Salicylic Acid‐Based Ear Wash Dilutions on Canine Otic Medication Microbicidal Effects on Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa Colonies
Author(s) -
Waitkevich Kevin Thomas
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
the faseb journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.709
H-Index - 277
eISSN - 1530-6860
pISSN - 0892-6638
DOI - 10.1096/fasebj.2019.33.1_supplement.648.8
Subject(s) - serial dilution , staphylococcus aureus , otitis , pseudomonas aeruginosa , medicine , neomycin , microbiology and biotechnology , agar dilution , veterinary medicine , antimicrobial , biology , bacteria , surgery , antibiotics , pathology , minimum inhibitory concentration , alternative medicine , genetics
Otitis externa is a prevalent ear condition in canines and felines. It is characterized by inflammation, pain, and a severe itch. Otitis externa is often caused by infection of pathogenic organisms with Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus being among the most common species associated with this condition. In severe cases, otitis externa can become malignant, spreading to other parts of the body, making this disease potentially fatal if permitted to persist. Entederm (Nystatin/Thiostrepton/Neomycin‐Sulfate) and Tresaderm (Thiabendazole//Neomycin) are common prescriptions used as treatments for these microorganisms. It is a common practice in veterinary medicine to prescribe a medicated ear wash along with these medications. Often times, clients fail to completely remove all wash from a patient's ear and medication gets diluted. This study sought to see if these dilutions are biologically significant. Each of the microorganisms were plated on 5% sheep's blood agar with either wash or water‐based diluted medications, with no medication, wash solution, and non‐dilute medications serving as controls. The mixtures, as well as non‐medicated controls, were plated and grown for 24 hours at 33.9°C. The resulting colony areas were imaged and quantified using ImageJ imaging software. The wash‐diluted medications were compared to the controls and the water‐based dilutions to determine if significant reduction occurred. The medication dilution with wash did not significantly decrease medication effectiveness for either bacterial species, but it did significantly increase the effectiveness of Entederm against Pseudomonas aeruginosa . However, wash‐dilutions had no significant difference from water‐dilutions, meaning there is little effect of wash on medications. Support or Funding Information The Saint Leo University Biology Department funded this project in full.Select images from the Staphylococcus aureus study. From left to right, Top: non‐dilute Tresaderm, 1:9 Tresaderm:water, 1:9 Tresaderm:Epi‐Otic. Middle: non‐dilute Entederm, 1:9 Entederm:water. Bottom: non‐medicated plate, Epi‐Otic‐medicated plate.Select images from the Pseudomonas aeruginosa study. From left to right, Top: non‐dilute Tresaderm, 1:9 Tresaderm:water, 1:9 Tresaderm:Epi‐Otic. Middle: non‐dilute Entederm, 1:9 Entederm:water. Bottom: non‐medicated plate, Epi‐Otic‐medicated plate.Statistical results of the medication dilution comparisons, wash vs water comparisons, the 40% reduction comparisons, and the wash vs medication comparisons.S. aureus: t‐Test (Sig. Change Hypothesis) P. aeruginosa: t‐Test (Sig. Change Hypothesis) Test Name P Value Hypothesis Test Name Value HypothesisEntederm: H20 Dilution 0.012 Reject Entederm: H20 Dilution 0.15 Fail Reject Entederm: Epi‐Otic Dilution 0.054 Fail Reject Entederm: Epi‐Otic Dilution 0.036 Reject Tresaderm: H20 Dilution 0.288 Fail Reject Tresaderm: H20 Dilution 0.043 Reject Tresaderm: Epi‐Otic Dilution 0.186 Fail Reject Tresaderm: Epi‐Otic Di lution 0.465 Fail RejectS. aureus: t‐Test (Water vs Wash Hypothesis) P. aeruginosa : t‐Test (Water vs Wash Hypothesis) Entederm: H20 vs Epi‐Otic Dillution 0.088 Fail Reject Entederm: H20 vs Epi‐Otic Dillution 0.118 Fail Reject Tresaderm: H20 vs Epi‐Otic Dillution 0.373 Fail Reject Tresaderm: H20 vs Epi‐Otic Dillution 0.032 RejectS. aureus : t‐Test (40% Hypothesis) P. aeruginosa: t‐Test (40% Hypothesis) Test Name P Value Hypothesis Test Name Value Hypothesis Entederm: Epi‐Otic Dilution 2.53E‐07 Reject Entederm: Epi‐Otic Dilution 0.051 Fail Reject Tresaderm: Epi‐Otic Dilution 0.143 Fail Reject Tresaderm: Epi‐Otic Di lution 0.101 Fail RejectS. aureus : t‐Test (Epi‐Otic vs Medications) P. aeruginosa :t‐Test (Epi‐Otic vs Medications) Test Name P Value Hypothesis Test Name P Value Hypothesis Epi‐Otic vs Entederm 4.43E‐06 Reject Epi‐Otic vs Entederm 0.347 Fail Reject Epi‐Otic vs Tresaderm 7.5E‐07 Reject Epi‐Otic vs Tresaderm 0.26 Fail RejectThis abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2019 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal .