Формування мікробних біоплівок при травматичних пошкодженнях допоміжного апарату ока

O.V. Petrenko; M.M. Dranko; V.M. Golubnycha; L.V. Grytsai

doi:10.31288/oftalmolzh201963943

Authors

O.V. Petrenko P.L. Shupyk National Medical Academy of Postgraduate Education; Kyiv (Ukraine)
M.M. Dranko P.L. Shupyk National Medical Academy of Postgraduate Education; Kyiv (Ukraine), Sumy Regional Clinical Hospital, Eye Microsurgery Department; Sumy (Ukraine)
V.M. Golubnycha Sumy State University, Medical Institute, Public Health Department; Sumy (Ukraine)
L.V. Grytsai Sumy Regional Clinical Hospital, Eye Microsurgery Department; Sumy (Ukraine)

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31288/oftalmolzh201963943

Keywords:

biofilm, microorganisms, wound infection, ocular adnexa, crystal violet

Abstract

Introduction. Biofilms (microbial communities) can be formed by both pathogenic and non-pathogenic microorganisms. The formation of biofilms causes many problems in the clinical practice as they slow down the healing process and are often characterized by antibiotic resistance.

Purpose. To study the ability of microorganisms that were obtained from the wounds of patients with traumatic injuries to the ocular adnexa to form biofilms.

Materials and Methods. 60 patients with traumatic ocular adnexal injuries were examined. The bacteriological examination of wound swabs was carried out with species composition and population levels of the microflora defined. The ability of microorganisms to form biofilms was further analyzed. The biofilm studies were performed to determine the amount of biomass generated [O'Toole and Kolter, 1998] by dyeing the biofilms with crystal violet. The method is based on the ability of the crystal violet dye to bind to cells and a matrix of biofilm. The results were interpreted according to the optical density of the dyed solvent.

Results. Seventy-five (75) strains of microorganisms were collected and identified from sixty (60) patients. Gram-positive and gram-negative microflora made up 73% (n=54) and 27% (n=20), respectively. The leading positions were taken by Staphylococcus aureus (n=21), Acinetobacter spp. (n=11), Кlebsiellа ozenae (n=8), Micrococcus spp. (n=8), Corynebacterium spp. (n=5), Artrobacter cuminsii (n=4), Staphylococcus epidermidis (n=3). The greatest ability for biofilm formation was manifested in Staphylococcus aureus, Acinetobacter spp. and Klebsiella ozenae, which are the representatives of the opportunistic flora.

Staphylococcus aureus was most intensively forming a biofilm in the time interval from Day 1 to Day 3; Acinetobacter spp. was most active during the first day and Klebsiella ozenae – Day 3 to Day 7.

Conclusions. Most clinically relevant microorganisms that had been collected from the wounds of patients with traumatic injuries of the ocular adnexa had an ability to form microbial biofilms. This ability was most evident in Staphylococcus aureus, Acinetobacter spp. and Klebsiella ozenae, which are the representatives of the opportunistic flora.

References

1.Mardanova AM, Kabanov DA, Rudakova NL, Sharypova MR. [Biofilms: basic research methods: study guide]. Kazan: К(P)FU; 2016. 42 p. In Russian.

2.Yuzhakov AM, Hundorova RA, Neroev VV, Stepanov AV. [Intraocular Wound Infection: Guideline for Physicians]. Moscow: Ltd. Meditsinskoe informatsionnoe agenstvo; 2007. 240p. In Russian.

3.Liuta VA, Kononov OV. [Microbiology with microbiological research technique, virology and immunology: A Textbook (For higher education institutions I-III levels of accreditation). 2nd ed.] Kyiv: Medytsyna; 2018. 576 p. In Ukrainian.

4.Nedashkivska VV, Dronova ML, Vrynchanu NO. [Biofilms and their role in infectious diseases]. Ukrayinskiy naukovo-medichniy molodizhniy Zh. 2016; 98(4):11-19. In Ukrainian. Available from: https://msgl-journal.com/index.php/journal/article/download/85/84

5.Okulych VK, Kabanova AA, Plotnikov FV. [Microbal biofilms in clinical microbiology and antibiotic therapy]. Vitiebsk: VGMU; 2017. 300 p. In Russian.

6.Osypova EV, Shypytsyna YV, Naumenko ZS. [A comparative quantitative evaluation of the potential of biofilm formation by different bacterial clinical strains on polystirole and glass surface]. Mezhdunarodnyi zhurnal prikladnyh i fundamentalnyh issledovaniy. 2014;8-1:55-58. In Russian. Available from: https://applied-research.ru/ru/article/view?id=5638

7.Petrenko OM, Bezrodnyi BH, Bondarchuk OL. [Formation of biofilms by soft tissue phlegmon]. Khirurhiya Ukraini. 2016;1:85-89. In Ukrainian. Available from: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/KhU_2016_1_16

8.Sidashenko O., Voronkova O., Sirokvasha O., Vinnikov A. [Methods to study the dynamics biofilm-formation of opportunistic bacteria]. Visnyk Lvivskoho Universitetu. Series Biology. 2014;65:20-33. In Ukrainian. Available from: http://prima.lnu.edu.ua/faculty/biologh/wis/65/0/2/2.pdf

9.Symonova YR, Holovyn SN, Verkyna LM, Berezniak EA, Tytova SV. [Methods of culturing and studying bacterial biofilms]. Izvestiya Vuzov. Severo-Kavkazskii Region. 2017;1:73-79. In Russian. Available from: https://lib.rucont.ru/efd/597919/info

10.Chebotar YV. [Biofilms of Staphylococcus aureus: structural and functional characteristics and the relationship with neutrophils: a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Medicine]. N. Novgorod. 2014: 43. In Russian.

11.Percival SL, McCarty SM, Lipsky B. [Biofilms and Wounds: An Overview of the Evidence]. Advances in Wound Care. 2015;4(7):373-381.https://doi.org/10.1089/wound.2014.0557