Premium
Microbiological analysis of conjunctival secretion in anophthalmic cavity, contralateral eye and ocular prosthesis of patients with maxillofacial abnormalities
Author(s) -
Guiotti A.M.,
Silva E.V.F.,
Catanoze I.A.,
Carvalho K.H.T.,
Malavazi E.M.,
Goiato M.C.,
Santos D.M.,
Almeida M.T.G.
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
letters in applied microbiology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.698
H-Index - 110
eISSN - 1472-765X
pISSN - 0266-8254
DOI - 10.1111/lam.12830
Subject(s) - ocular prosthesis , prosthesis , staphylococcus epidermidis , biofilm , ophthalmology , positive correlation , dentistry , medicine , staphylococcus aureus , biology , surgery , bacteria , genetics
The purpose of this study was to identify and analyse the micro‐organisms present in the conjunctival secretion in anophthalmic cavities of wearers of ocular prostheses, as well as on the prostheses used by them, correlating them with the microbiota of the contralateral eye. Nine patients with maxillofacial abnormalities, wearers of an acrylic resin ocular prosthesis participated in the study. Collections of conjunctival secretions and biofilm were performed on the prosthesis, anophthalmic cavity and contralateral eye for the mycological and bacterial analyses. The data were submitted to statistical analysis, performing a Kendall correlation test to identify the correlation between the collection site and the identified micro‐organism ( P < 0·05). It was verified that the most prevalent micro‐organisms were the Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis , independent of the collection site, and that negative cultures for fungi were encountered in 85·2% of collections, independent of the region. It was not possible to establish a correlation among the types of micro‐organisms and the collection sites. Significance and Impact of the Study Some evidence suggests that the surface roughness of ocular prostheses can influence interactions with micro‐organisms, with greater prejudicial consequences, such as the establishment of biofilms, which could lead to infections. Thus, it becomes extremely important to identify the micro‐organisms present on the acrylic surfaces of ocular prostheses, as well as the microbiota of the anophthalmic cavity and contralateral eye of wearers of the same, so that subsequent control measures promote the homeostatic maintenance of the ocular region.