| Literature DB >> 36011164 |
Prishita Mehta1, Rashmi Bhavasar1, Namratha A Ajith1, Rahul P Bhavsar2, Maha A Bahammam3,4, Mohammed Mousa H Bakri5, Khalid J Alzahrani6, Ahmad A Alghamdi6, Ibrahim F Halawani6, Shilpa Bhandi7,8, A Thirumal Raj9, Shankargouda Patil10,11.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Tobacco consumption is of major concern for public health. Compromised oral hygiene accentuated by tobacco leads to alteration in the oral mucosa and microbiome, including Candida, and its species can be identified rapidly using CHROMagar. Curcumin, a naturally available compound possesses antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, anti-microbial, anti-carcinogenic, anti-fungal, and immunomodulatory properties. Hence, a comprehensive study was planned. AIM: To evaluate and compare cytomorphometric analysis and Candida colonization and speciation in tobacco users before and after the use of curcumin gel.Entities:
Keywords: candida; chromagar; cytomorphometry; pre-cancer; tobacco
Year: 2022 PMID: 36011164 PMCID: PMC9407982 DOI: 10.3390/healthcare10081507
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Healthcare (Basel) ISSN: 2227-9032
Figure 1Tobacco user’s lesion on left buccal mucosa leukoplakia.
Figure 2Tobacco user’s lesion on right buccal mucosa along with oral submucous fibrosis.
Procedure for pap staining.
| Agent | Staining Time |
|---|---|
| Running water | 1 min |
| Harris hematoxylin | 6 min |
| Running water | 1 min |
| Aqueous HCL solution | |
| 6 dips | |
| Running water | 1 min |
| Lithium carbonate | |
| 2 min | |
| 50% ethanol | 10 dips |
| 95% ethanol | 6 to 8 dips |
| 95% ethanol | 6 to 8 dips |
| Orange G-6 | 1.5 min |
| 95% ethanol | Rinse gently |
| 95% ethanol | Rinse gently |
| Acid–Eosin 50 | 1.5 min |
| 95% ethanol | Rinse gently |
| 95% ethanol | Rinse gently |
| 100% ethanol | 6 to 8 dips |
| 100% ethanol | 6 to 8 dips |
| Xylene | 6 to 8 dips |
| Xylene | 6 to 8 dips |
Figure 5Papanicolaou Stained (PAP) smear showing cells from control group with Class I cytology.
Figure 6PAP smear showing cells from control group with Class I cytology cell diameter and nuclear diameter measurements.
Figure 7PAP smear showing cells from tobacco-user group with Class I cytology.
Figure 8PAP smear showing cells from tobacco-user group with Class II cytology.
Figure 9Cells showing micronuclei in cells from tobacco abusers.
Figure 11Candida colonies on Sabouard’s dextrose agar culture plates.
Figure 12Candida colony count on digital colony counter.
Figure 13Gram staining for detection of Candida.
Figure 14Candida albicans and Candida tropicalis on CHROMagar.
Figure 15Candida colonies on CHROMagar in control group.
Figure 16Candida colonies on CHROMagar in tobacco-user group.
Figure 17Tobacco Chewer’s Keratosis Prior (a) and After (b) the use of Curcumin.
Figure 18Hyperkeratotic Lesion on Left Buccal Mucosa Prior (a) and After (b) Intervention with Curcumin.
Figure 19CONSORT Flow Chart for study.
Age and gender distribution in study and control groups.
| Group | Gender | N | Mean | SD | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Study Group | Male | 36 | 34.31 | 5.569 | 0.064 |
| Female | 24 | 31.33 | 6.190 | ||
| Control Group | Male | 31 | 29.61 | 5.475 | 0.619 |
| Female | 29 | 28.33 | 5.092 |
Distribution of type of tobacco in study group.
| Type of Tobacco Habit in Study Group | No. of Patients |
|---|---|
| Smokeless Tobacco | 31 (51.6%) |
| Smoking Tobacco | 09(15%) |
| Smoking and Smokeless Tobacco | 20(33.4%) |
| Total | 60 |
Type of lesion based on clinical assessment.
| Type of Lesion Based on Clinical Assessment | Number of Participants |
|---|---|
| Leukoplakia | 21 (35%) |
| OSMF | 12 (20%) |
| Smokers Palate | 9 (15%) |
| Tobacco Pouch Keratosis | 18 (30%) |
| Control Group | 60 (100%) |
Comparison of cytomorphometry and microbial parameters among both study and control groups as well as pre- and post-intervention groups.
| Cytomorphometric Analysis (Pre-Intervention) | Study Group | Control Group | Pre-Intervention | Post-Intervention- | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean µm | SD | Mean µm | SD | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | |||
| Nuclear Diameter | 9.95 | 0.86 | 8.27 | 0.66 | 0.000 | 9.95 | 0.86 | 9.70 | 0.78 | 0.098 |
| Cell Diameter | 63.69 | 1.64 | 65.95 | 1.76 | 0.000 | 63.69 | 1.64 | 63.91 | 1.509 | 0.444 |
| CD:ND Ratio | 6.44 | 0.60 | 8.01 | 0.62 | 0.000 | 6.44 | 0.60 | 6.63 | 0.553 | 0.073 |
| Micronuclei | 1.86 | 1.04 | 0.37 | 0.49 | 0.000 | 1.86 | 1.04 | 0.88 | 0.555 | 0.000 |
| 44 (73.33%) | 12 (20.00%) | 0.000 | 12 (20.00%) | 42 (70.00%) | 0.000 | |||||
| 11 (18.33%) | 37 (61.67%) | 0.000 | 37 (61.67%) | 16 (26.67%) | 0.003 | |||||
| 4 (6.67%) | 9 (15.00%) | 0.165 | 9 (15.00%) | 1 (1.67%) | 0.011 | |||||
| 1 (1.67%) | 2 (3.33%) | 0.563 | 2 (3.33%) | 1 (1.67%) | 0.563 | |||||
| Number of Microbial Colonies | 10.57 | 2.68 | 3.88 | 1.43 | 0.001 | 10.57 | 2.68 | 5.02 | 2.38 | 0.000 |
| Colony Appearance Duration | 1.15 | 0.36 | 2.20 | 0.73 | 0.001 | 1.15 | 0.36 | 2.02 | 0.70 | 0.000 |
Distribution of cytomorphometry and microbial parameters in tobacco lesions as per clinical assessment.
| Leukoplakia | OSMF | Smokers Palate | Tobacco Pouch Keratosis | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pre | Post | Pre | Post | Pre | Post | Pre | Post | |||||
|
| 63.89 ± 1.63 | 64.01 ± 1.50 | 0.805 | 63.48 ± 1.63 | 63.74 ± 1.50 | 0.688 | 63.77 ± 1.63 | 64.03 ± 1.51 | 0.730 | 63.58 ± 1.60 | 63.87 ± 1.49 | 0.577 |
|
| 9.97 ± 0.86 | 9.87 ± 0.80 | 0.698 | 9.86 ± 0.85 | 9.79 ± 0.77 | 0.654 | 9.90 ± 0.84 | 9.85 ± 0.79 | 0.898 | 10.03 ± 0.87 | 9.372 ± 0.78 | 0.022 |
|
| 6.43 ± 0.60 | 6.543 ± 0.56 | 0.542 | 6.48 ± 0.59 | 6.54 ± 0.55 | 0.799 | 6.54 ± 0.59 | 6.55 ± 0.56 | 0.971 | 6.38 ± 0.61 | 6.851 ± 0.56 | 0.021 |
|
| 1.95 ± 1.06 | 0.71 ± 0.57 | 0.0001 | 1.41 ± 1.03 | 0.83 ± 0.55 | 0.099 | 2.33 ± 1.04 | 1.11 ± 0.57 | 0.007 | 1.83 ± 1.05 | 1 ± 0.56 | 0.005 |
|
| 06 ± 0.69 | 11 ± 0.63 | 0.000 | 02 ± 0.57 | 09 ± 0.61 | 0.000 | - | 07 ± 0.61 | - | 04 ± 0.75 | 15 ± 0.61 | 0.000 |
|
| 13 ± 0.65 | 08 ± 0.62 | 0.000 | 08 ± 0.70 | 03 ± 0.48 | 0.000 | 06 ± 0.59 | 02 ± 0.50 | 0.000 | 10 ± 0.65 | 03 ± 0.63 | 0.000 |
|
| 01 | 01 | - | 01 | - | - | 03 ± 0.67 | - | - | 04 ± 0.71 | - | - |
|
| 01 | 01 | - | 01 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
|
| 11.619 ± 2.72 | 5.238 ± 2.40 | 0.000 | 9 ± 2.70 | 4.25 ± 2.35 | 0.000 | 10 ± 2.74 | 5.333 ± 2.37 | 0.001 | 10.666 ± 2.70 | 5.111 ± 2.38 | 0.000 |
Association between the class of cytology and type of Candida.
| Class of Cytology |
|
|
|
| Total Class of Cytology | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pre | Post | Control | Pre | Post | Control | Pre | Post | Control | Pre | Post | Control | Pre | Post | Control | |
|
| - | 08 | 44 | 02 | 05 | 11 | - | - | 04 | - | - | 01 | 02 | 13 | 60 |
|
| 08 | 19 | - | 17 | 05 | - | 04 | - | - | 02 | 01 | - | 31 | 25 | - |
|
| 04 | 15 | - | 18 | 06 | - | 05 | 01 | - | - | - | - | 27 | 22 | - |
|
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||||
|
| 12 | 42 | 44 | 37 | 16 | 11 | 9 | 01 | 04 | 02 | 01 | 01 | |||
Association between the type of tobacco and type of Candida.
| Type of Tobacco |
|
|
|
| Total | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pre | Post | Pre | Post | Pre | Post | Pre | Post | ||
|
| 08 | 24 | 18 | 7 | 4 | - | 1 | - | 31 |
|
| 01 | 07 | 5 | 2 | 3 | - | - | - | 9 |
|
| 03 | 11 | 14 | 7 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 20 |