Maha Mohssen Abdelfattah1, Rania Abdelmonem Khattab2, Magda H Mahran1, Ebrahim S Elborgy3. 1. Microbiology and Immunology Department, Research Institute of Ophthalmology, Giza12556, Egypt. 2. Microbiology and Immunology Department, Faculty of Pharmacy, Cairo University, Kasr Al-Aini 11562, Cairo, Egypt. 3. Ophthalmology Department, Research Institute of Ophthalmology, Giza 12556, Egypt.
Abstract
AIM: To determine the possibility of the development of dry eye disease (DED) as a result of persistent infection with Chlamydia trachomatis and Ureaplasma urealyticum in the conjunctiva of patients. METHODS: This study was conducted on 58 patients of age range 20-50y, diagnosed with DED confirmed by Schirmer I test and tear breakup time. The non-dry eye control group included 27 subjects of the same age. Ocular specimens were collected as conjunctival scrapings and swabs divided into three groups: the first used for bacterial culture, the second and third taken to detect Chlamydia trachomatis and Ureaplasma urealyticum by direct fluorescent antibody (DFA) assay and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) method. RESULTS: Chlamydia trachomatis was detected in 65.5% and 76% of DED patients by DFA and PCR methods respectively. Ureaplasma urealyticum was found in 44.8% of DED infected patients using the PCR method. Both organisms were identified in only 37.9% of DED patients found to be infected. Control subjects had a 22% detection rate of Chlamydia trachomatis by DFA assay versus a 7% detection rate by PCR; while Ureaplasma urealyticum was detected in 3.7% of the controls by PCR method. The conjunctival culture revealed that gram positive microorganisms represented 75% of isolates with coagulase negative Staphylococci the most common (50%) followed by Staphylococcus aureus (20%), whereas gram negative microorganisms occurred in 25% of cases, isolating Moraxella spp. as the most frequent organism. CONCLUSION: Our results tend to point out that Chlamydia trachomatis and Ureaplasma urealyticum were detected in a moderate percentage of patients with DED, and could be a fair possibility for its development. PCR is more reliable in detecting Chlamydia trachomatis than DFA technique. The presence of isolated conjunctival bacterial microflora can be of some potential value.
AIM: To determine the possibility of the development of dry eye disease (DED) as a result of persistent infection with Chlamydia trachomatis and Ureaplasma urealyticum in the conjunctiva of patients. METHODS: This study was conducted on 58 patients of age range 20-50y, diagnosed with DED confirmed by Schirmer I test and tear breakup time. The non-dry eye control group included 27 subjects of the same age. Ocular specimens were collected as conjunctival scrapings and swabs divided into three groups: the first used for bacterial culture, the second and third taken to detect Chlamydia trachomatis and Ureaplasma urealyticum by direct fluorescent antibody (DFA) assay and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) method. RESULTS:Chlamydia trachomatis was detected in 65.5% and 76% of DED patients by DFA and PCR methods respectively. Ureaplasma urealyticum was found in 44.8% of DED infectedpatients using the PCR method. Both organisms were identified in only 37.9% of DED patients found to be infected. Control subjects had a 22% detection rate of Chlamydia trachomatis by DFA assay versus a 7% detection rate by PCR; while Ureaplasma urealyticum was detected in 3.7% of the controls by PCR method. The conjunctival culture revealed that gram positive microorganisms represented 75% of isolates with coagulase negative Staphylococci the most common (50%) followed by Staphylococcus aureus (20%), whereas gram negative microorganisms occurred in 25% of cases, isolating Moraxella spp. as the most frequent organism. CONCLUSION: Our results tend to point out that Chlamydia trachomatis and Ureaplasma urealyticum were detected in a moderate percentage of patients with DED, and could be a fair possibility for its development. PCR is more reliable in detecting Chlamydia trachomatis than DFA technique. The presence of isolated conjunctival bacterial microflora can be of some potential value.
Authors: Naylia A Zigangirova; Yulia P Rumyantseva; Elena Y Morgunova; Lidia N Kapotina; Lubov V Didenko; Elena A Kost; Ekaterina A Koroleva; Yuriy K Bashmakov; Ivan M Petyaev Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2013-02-13 Impact factor: 3.411