| Literature DB >> 33558775 |
Elif Ersoy Çallıoğlu1, Sami Berçin2, Gülçin Başdemir3, Muzaffer Kiriş2, İlkan Tatar4, Arzu Tuzuner5, Tolga Oğuzhan6, Tuba Müderris7, Mustafa Fevzi Sargon8, Mehmet Hakan Korkmaz2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of N-acetylcysteine (NAC) on biofilm layers and on the course of disease in chronic otitis media.Entities:
Keywords: N-acetylcysteine; biofilm; chronic otitis; rat
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33558775 PMCID: PMC7889258 DOI: 10.14639/0392-100X-N0996
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital ISSN: 0392-100X Impact factor: 2.124
Figure 1.Group1 rats, acute suppurative inflammation in middle ear (ME); there is no involvement in inner ear (İE), routine histological characteristics (suppuration +++, fibrosis-).
Figure 2.Group 1, residual necrotic lamellous bone (LB) fragments due to destruction in middle ear (ME) bone wall, caused by infection at the recovery process. Overlying new woven bone (WB) tissue and thin fibrous wall are seen on the surface of degenerated epithelium. Suppuration continues in the lümen (suppuration +, fibrosis +).
Histopathological findings of cases undergoing only treatment or NAC plus treatment.
| Group 2 | Group 1 | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.963[ | |||
| - | 4 (22.2%) | 2 (11.1%) | |
| + | 3 (16.7%) | 8 (44.4%) | |
| ++ | 4 (22.2%) | 0 (0.0%) | |
| +++ | 7 (38.9%) | 8 (44.4%) | |
| 0.963[ | |||
| - | 4 (22.2%) | 2 (11.1%) | |
| + | 5 (27.8%) | 4 (22.2%) | |
| ++ | 3 (16.7%) | 11 (61.1%) | |
| +++ | 6 (33.3%) | 1 (5.6%) | |
| 0.338[ | |||
| Normal | 14 (77.8%) | 17 (94.4%) | |
| Involved | 4 (22.2%) | 1 (5.6%) | |
| 0.462[ | |||
| Improved | 5 (27.8%) | 10 (55.6%) | |
| Acute suppurative | 7 (38.9%) | 1 (5.6%) | |
| Chronic suppurative | 6 (33.3%) | 7 (38.9%) |
† Mann Whitney U test
‡ Fisher’s Exact test.
SEM findings in groups 1 and groups 2.
| Group 2 | Group 1 | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.690[ | |||
| + | 1 (20.0%) | 2 (40.0%) | |
| ++ | 4 (80.0%) | 3 (60.0%) | |
| +++ | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) |
† Mann Whitney U test.
Figure 3.Group 1 rats, SEM appearance of biofilm layer.
Figure 4.SEM appearance of biofilm layer in Group 2 rats.
Figure 5.Control group SEM findings.