Cargando…
Bacterial biofilm in salivary stones
PURPOSE: To assess the susceptibility of salivary stones to bacterial biofilm formation, which may be involved in the development of salivary gland infection, and to investigate a relation between microbiological aspects and patient characteristics. METHODS: This prospective study comprises of 54 pa...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6529597/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31028534 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00405-019-05445-1 |
_version_ | 1783420431767699456 |
---|---|
author | Perez-Tanoira, Ramón Aarnisalo, Antti Haapaniemi, Aaro Saarinen, Riitta Kuusela, Pentti Kinnari, Teemu J. |
author_facet | Perez-Tanoira, Ramón Aarnisalo, Antti Haapaniemi, Aaro Saarinen, Riitta Kuusela, Pentti Kinnari, Teemu J. |
author_sort | Perez-Tanoira, Ramón |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: To assess the susceptibility of salivary stones to bacterial biofilm formation, which may be involved in the development of salivary gland infection, and to investigate a relation between microbiological aspects and patient characteristics. METHODS: This prospective study comprises of 54 patients with sialolithiasis attended in Helsinki University Hospital during 2014–2016. A total of 55 salivary stones were removed, and studied for biofilm formation using fluorescence microscopy and sonication. The isolated organisms were quantified and identified using matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry. RESULTS: Biofilm formation was confirmed on the surface of 39 (70.9%) stones. A total of 96 microorganisms were isolated from 45 salivary stones (81.8%). Two or more organisms were isolated in 33 (73.3%) cases. The main isolates were Streptococcus mitis/oralis (n = 27; 28.1%), followed by Streptococcus anginosus (n = 10; 9.6%), Rothia spp. (n = 8; 8.3%), Streptococcus constellatus (n = 7; 7.3%), and Streptococcus gordonii (n = 6; 6.2%). In all patients showing pre-operative (12 cases) or peri-operative (three cases) drainage of pus, the presence of biofilm was detected in microscopy (p = 0.004). Four patients showed post-operative infection, and in three of them (75.0%), the presence of biofilm was detected. Increased number of pus drainage was found among patients with reflux symptoms or use of proton-pump inhibitors. CONCLUSIONS: Salivary stones are susceptible to bacterial biofilm formation, which could be related with the development and severity of the inflammation and the refractory nature of the disease. Sonication of salivary gland stones could be a useful method for finding the etiology of the chronic infection. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6529597 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-65295972019-06-07 Bacterial biofilm in salivary stones Perez-Tanoira, Ramón Aarnisalo, Antti Haapaniemi, Aaro Saarinen, Riitta Kuusela, Pentti Kinnari, Teemu J. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Head & Neck PURPOSE: To assess the susceptibility of salivary stones to bacterial biofilm formation, which may be involved in the development of salivary gland infection, and to investigate a relation between microbiological aspects and patient characteristics. METHODS: This prospective study comprises of 54 patients with sialolithiasis attended in Helsinki University Hospital during 2014–2016. A total of 55 salivary stones were removed, and studied for biofilm formation using fluorescence microscopy and sonication. The isolated organisms were quantified and identified using matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry. RESULTS: Biofilm formation was confirmed on the surface of 39 (70.9%) stones. A total of 96 microorganisms were isolated from 45 salivary stones (81.8%). Two or more organisms were isolated in 33 (73.3%) cases. The main isolates were Streptococcus mitis/oralis (n = 27; 28.1%), followed by Streptococcus anginosus (n = 10; 9.6%), Rothia spp. (n = 8; 8.3%), Streptococcus constellatus (n = 7; 7.3%), and Streptococcus gordonii (n = 6; 6.2%). In all patients showing pre-operative (12 cases) or peri-operative (three cases) drainage of pus, the presence of biofilm was detected in microscopy (p = 0.004). Four patients showed post-operative infection, and in three of them (75.0%), the presence of biofilm was detected. Increased number of pus drainage was found among patients with reflux symptoms or use of proton-pump inhibitors. CONCLUSIONS: Salivary stones are susceptible to bacterial biofilm formation, which could be related with the development and severity of the inflammation and the refractory nature of the disease. Sonication of salivary gland stones could be a useful method for finding the etiology of the chronic infection. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2019-04-26 2019 /pmc/articles/PMC6529597/ /pubmed/31028534 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00405-019-05445-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. |
spellingShingle | Head & Neck Perez-Tanoira, Ramón Aarnisalo, Antti Haapaniemi, Aaro Saarinen, Riitta Kuusela, Pentti Kinnari, Teemu J. Bacterial biofilm in salivary stones |
title | Bacterial biofilm in salivary stones |
title_full | Bacterial biofilm in salivary stones |
title_fullStr | Bacterial biofilm in salivary stones |
title_full_unstemmed | Bacterial biofilm in salivary stones |
title_short | Bacterial biofilm in salivary stones |
title_sort | bacterial biofilm in salivary stones |
topic | Head & Neck |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6529597/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31028534 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00405-019-05445-1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pereztanoiraramon bacterialbiofilminsalivarystones AT aarnisaloantti bacterialbiofilminsalivarystones AT haapaniemiaaro bacterialbiofilminsalivarystones AT saarinenriitta bacterialbiofilminsalivarystones AT kuuselapentti bacterialbiofilminsalivarystones AT kinnariteemuj bacterialbiofilminsalivarystones |