medigraphic.com

2002, Number 3

Next >>

Bioquimia 2002; 27 (3)

Detection of Actinomyces spp, in cervico-vaginal secretions of women with and without intrauterine device

García-Cano RE, Camargo-Velasco A, Carrera-Terrazas A, Galán-Gutiérrez NA, Núñez RV, Rojas CML

Language: Spanish
References: 48
Page: 60-68
PDF size: 380.55 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: Alteration of the vaginal ecosystem can be provoked by the use of barrier contraceptives. Diaphragm and intrauterine device (IUD) can worsen this condition. The latter in particular, contributes to an increase in infections. To isolate and identify Actinomyces spp and other microorganisms from cervico-vaginal secretions of women who have been using IUD and correlating the findings of Actinomyces with the Papanicolaou stain.
Material and methods: One-hundred and six women were using an IUD and 94 were not. The sample in which Actinomyces spp and other obligated anaerobes were looked for was immediately cultured in appropiate media. Endocervical samples were taken in order to perform a microbiological study of Neisseria, Chlamydia, Trichomonas, Mycoplasma and Ureaplasma. Cells from the uterine cervix were exfoliated in order to have Pap and Gram steins made.
Results: Actinomyces israelii was isolated in 9.7% of all the studied patients who had IUD. Moreover, A. naeslundii was isolated in four cases and A. odontolyticus in one. The microbiological studies and the discovery of actinomicotic granules by the Pap stain produced a correlation culture/Pap stain of 50%. Associated bacterial flora was diverse; Neisseria gonorrhoeae culture was negative.
Conclusions: Actinomyces was not isolated in any of the samples from the 94 IUD non-user women. Anaerobic bacteria colonization was superior in women who were using the IUD as their contraceptive method of choice.


REFERENCES

  1. 1.De Palo G. Colposcopía y patología del tracto genital inferior femenino2a. ed.: Editorial Médica Panamericana; 1996.

  2. 2.Hansen SL, Stewart BJ. A reliable test for differentiation and presuntiveidentificacion of certain clinically significant anaerobes. J Clin Pathol1978; 69 (1): 36-40.

  3. 3.Amsel RMD. Nonspecific vaginitis diagnosis criteria and microbial andepidemiologic asociation. Am J Med 1983; 74: 14-21.

  4. 4.Blauster A. Pathology of the female genital tract. 2nd ed.: Editor’sPringer Verlag; 1986.

  5. 5.Chen KCS, Amsel RMD, Eschenbach DA, Holmes KK. DiagnósticoBioquímico de la Vaginitis. Infec 1983; 3(6): 285-297.

  6. 6.Clyde WA, Kenny GE, Schachter J. Laboratory diagnosis of chlamydialand Mycoplasma Infections. Washington DC: Cumitech 19 AMS; 1984.

  7. 7.Luff RD, Gupta PK, Spencer MR. Pelvic Actinomicosis and the intrauterinecontraceptive device. Am J Clin Pathol 1978; 69(6): 581-586.

  8. 8.Gupta K, Holander DH, Frost JK. Actinomycetes in cervico vaginal smears:an association with IUD usage. Acta Cytol 1976; 20 (4): 295-297.

  9. 9.Gupta PK. Intrauterine contraceptive Devices vaginal cytologyPathologic changes and Clinical Implications. Acta Cytol 1982; 26(5):571-613.

  10. 10.Fiorino AS. Intrauterine contraceptive device-associated Actinomycoticabscess and Actinomyces detection on cervical smear. Obstet Gynecol1996; 87(1): 142-149.

  11. 11.Gupta PK, Shurbaji MS, Neuman MM. Hepatic Actinomicosis diagnosed byfine needle aspiration a case report. Acta Cytol 1987; 31(6): 751-551.

  12. 12.Hernández-Méndez JT, Alonso Rojo H, Escamilla Avilés E, Aquino SantiagoC. Microorganismos asociados con Chlamydia trachomatis aislados depacientes con leucorrea. An Esc Nac Cienc Biol 2000; 46 (1): 53-61.

  13. Koss LG. Diagnostic cytology and it’s histophatologic bases. 4 thed.: Lippincott Company; 1992.

  14. Novak ER, Jones HW. Gynecologic Cytopathology Novak’s textbook ofGynecology. 11 th ed.: William & Wilkins; 1988.

  15. Rodríguez CJ, Lacruz PC. Diagnóstico de Actinomyces en frotis cérvico-vaginales de mujeres portadoras de DIU. Cytol 1982; 1 (7): 14-17

  16. Slack JM & Gerencser M. Actinomyces, Filamentous Bacteria, Biology anPathogenecity. West Virginia: Burgess Publishing Co; 1993.

  17. Koneman EW, Allen SD, Janda WN, Schreckenberges PC, Winn WC. ColorAtlas and Textbook of Diagnostic Microbiology. 4th ed. Philadelphia:J.B. Lippincott Co; 1992.

  18. Flores-Sombrero JI. Estudio del género Mobiluncus como probablepatógeno en la vaginosis. Tesis de Licenciatura. Universidad dePuebla. Escuela de Ciencias Químicas; 1984.

  19. García-Ramos E, Hernández-Méndez JT. Manual para el aislamiento eidentificación de bacterias anaerobias. México DF: IPN, ENCB; 1988.

  20. García-Ramos E, Giono CS, Aparicio Ozores G, Hernández-Méndez JT.Bacteriología Médica. México DF: ENCB, IPN; 2001.

  21. Gil-Juárez C, Calderón BA, Montero J, Yañez A, Cedillo L. Detección deMycoplasma hominis, Ureaplasma urealyticum en mujeres con o sin actividadsexual. Rev Lat Amer Microbiol 1996; 38 (2): 81-58

  22. Guido Funke, Graevenitz A, Claridge III JE, Bernard KA. Clinical Microbiologyof Coryneform bacteria. Clin Microbiol Rev 1997; 10(1): 125-159.

  23. Lewis R, McKenzie D, Baggs, Dickie A. Experience with a novelselective Medium for isolation of Actinomyces spp. from medical anddental specimens. J Clin Microbiol 1995; 33 (6): 1613-1616.

  24. Roberts M, Baron E, Finegold S, Kenn G. Antigenic distintive ofMobiluncus curtisii and Mobiluncus mulieris. J Clin Microbiol 1985; 21(6 ): 891-893.

  25. Spiegel CA. Bacterial vaginosis. Clin Microbiol Rev 1991; 4(4): 485-502.

  26. Tryanor RM, Parrat D, Duguid HL, Duncan ID. Isolation of Actinomycetesfrom cervical specimens. J Clin Pathol 1991; 34: 914-916.

  27. Miller PH, Wiggs LS, J Miller M. Evaluation of API, An-IDENT and RapID ANA II. Sistems for Identification of Actinomyces species fromclinical specimens. J Clin Microbiol 1995; 33 (2): 329-330.

  28. Murray PR, Baron EJ, Ptaller M, Tenover FC, Yolken RH. Manual deClinical Microbiology. 6 th ed. Washington DC: ASM Press: 1999.

  29. Bonifaz A. Micología Médica. México DF: Ed. Méndez Cervantes; 1991.

  30. Maldonado Arellano Marisela C. Aislamiento e identificación de hongosoportunistas causantes de infección en pacientes del Hospital deOncología del Centro Médico Nacional Siglo XXI. IMSS. Tesis deLicenciatura, ENCB, IPN.México DF.

  31. González-Pedraza, Ortíz Zaragoza HC, Inzunza Montiel AE, Ponce RosasRE. Frecuencia de aislamiento Ureaplasma urealyticum en una poblaciónabierta del Sur de la Ciudad de México. Rev Lat Amer Microbiol 1995;37 (2): 79-86.

  32. Norma Oficial Mexicana de los Servicios de Planificación Familiar.Secretaría de Salud. México DF; 1994.

  33. Alonso Ruiz P, Larios N, Serrano-Espinoza A, Lorenzana R. Compendiode Citología Ginecológica. Monografía No.5. Sociedad Médica delHospital General de México. SSA. 1981.

  34. Nugent RP, Krhon MA, Hillier SL. Retiability of diagnosing bacterialvaginosis improve by standardized method of Gram stain interpretation.1991. J Clin Microbiol; 29 (2 ): 297-301.

  35. Smith HJ, Moore HB. Isolation of Mobiluncus species from colonialspecimens by using cold enrichment and selective media. J ClinMicrobiol 1988; 26 (6): 1134-1137.

  36. Echaniz Avilés G, Calderón Jaimes E, Carnalla Barajas N, Soto NoguerónA, Cruz Valdez A, Gatíca Marquina R. Prevalencia de infección cévico-vaginal por Chlamydia trachomatis en población femenina de la ciudadde Cuernavaca, Morelos. Sal Pub Mex 1992; 34 (3): 301-307.

  37. Deleón Rodríguez I, Hernández-Méndez JT. Chlamydia Trachomatis: ¿UnProblema de Salud Pública en México? IPN. México DF: Escuela Nacionalde Ciencias Biológicas; 2000.

  38. Narcio-Reyes MLE. Infecciones causadas por Chlamydia trachomatis.Infectol 1987; 7 (5): 205-218.

  39. Bañuelos Pánuco CA, Delón Rodríguez I, Hernández-Méndez JT, MartínezGuzmán LA, Fierro DA, Miranda Murillo J, et al. Detection of Chlamydiatrachomatis in pregnant women by the Papanocolaou technique, EnzymeImmunoassay and Polimerase Chain Reaction. Acta Cytol 2000; 44(2): 114-123.

  40. Baron EJO, Casell GH, Duffy LB, Eschenbach DA, Greenwood JR, HarveySM, et al. Laboratory diagnosis of female genital Tract infections.Washington, DC: Cumitech 17A ASM Press; 1993.

  41. Hillier SL, Krohn MA, Rabe LK, Klebanoff SJ, Eschenbach DA. Thenormal vaginal flora H2O2-Producing Lactobacilli, and bacterial vaginosisin pregnant women. Clin Infect Dis 1993; 16 (4): 273-281.

  42. Angeles-López M, García-Cano Ramos E, Aquino Santiago C. Hydrogenperoxide production and resistance to nonoxinol-9 in Lactobacillusspp isolated from the vagina of reproductive age women. Rev Lat AmerMicrobiol 2001; 43 (4): 171-176.

  43. Roberts M, Hillier S, Schoerknecht F, Holmes J. Filter blots for speciesidentification of Mobiluncus curtisii and Mobiluncus mulieris. J ClinMicrobiol 1984; 20 (6 ): 826-827.

  44. Rodloff A, Appelbaum PC, Zabransky RS. Practical Anaerobic Bacteriology.Washington DC: Cumitech 5 ASM Press; 1991.

  45. Ridríguez G. Sexualidad y pragmatismo en las nuevas generaciones.Conciencia Latinoamericana. México DF: Afluentes SC; 2001.

  46. Chatwani A, Amin-Hanjani S. Incidence of Actinomycosis Associatedwith Intrauterine Contraceptive devices. J Reproduct Med 1994; 39(8): 585-587.

  47. Cauich Sánchez P, Alatriste Mondragón F, García-Cano Ramos E, AquinoSantiago. Identification of anaerobic nonsporoforming Gram Positivebacilli by biochemical tests and Gas Liquid Chromatography. Rev LatAmer Microbol 2001; 43 (1): 27-35

  48. Leslie DE, & SM Garland. Comparison of inmunoflorescence and culturefor the detection of Actinomyces israelii in wears of intrauterinecontraceptive devices. J Med Microbiol 1991; 35: 224-228.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com