ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: A rapid detection of Legionella bacteria in water samples is crucial to minimize the risk of acquiring infections, especially in health care facilities. Different detection methods and different decontamination procedures have been reported to affect the recovery of Legionella spp. Our goal was to test the recovery of Legionella pneumophila and Legionella non-pneumophila species using a kit based on non-specific and species-specific probes to treat water samples after two different decontamination procedures. METHODS: The study was conducted with samples collected in the teaching hospital "Le Scotte" of Siena (Italy). Waters samples were analyzed by: i) ScanVIT method after treatment with acids; ii) ScanVIT method after heating; and iii) cultural standard method after heating. The results of the decontamination procedures and the detection methods were evaluated by comparing the number of Legionella-positive and -negative samples, and the recovery rates (CFU l-1) obtained by ScanVIT and the standard method. RESULTS: We find that ScanVIT method is highly sensitive with both decontamination treatments, yielding a higher recovery of L. pneumophila compared to the standard method. Conversely, ScanVIT associated with the acid-treatment yielded the highest recovery of L. non-pneumophila. CONCLUSIONS: The acid-treatment combined to the ScanVIT method increases the recovery of L. non-pneumophila in water samples compared to both ScanVIT associated with heat-treatment and standard culture method. Thus, this method may represent the best choice to detect L. non-pneumophila in water samples and reduce the risk of infection due to underestimation of Legionella loads.
Subject(s)
Fluorescent Antibody Technique , Legionella/isolation & purification , Water Microbiology , Water Supply , Acids , Colony Count, Microbial , Hospitals, University , Hot Temperature , Humans , Italy , Legionella pneumophila/isolation & purification , Sensitivity and Specificity , Species Specificity , Water Purification/methodsABSTRACT
Owing to diabetes, atherosclerosis, and ageing, there are several million patients undergoing skin lesions degenerated into infected ulcers with very little tendency to heal and implying a huge socioeconomical cost. Previous medical experience has shown that the daily application of ozonated oil eliminates the infection and promotes a rapid healing. The purpose of the study is the optimization of the antimicrobial effect of ozonated oils by testing in vitro four bacterial species and one yeast without or in the presence of different amounts of human serum. The results obtained suggest that a gentle and continuous removal of debris and exudate is an essential condition for the potent bactericidal effect of ozonated oils. In fact, even small amounts of human serum inactivate ozone derivatives and protect bacteria. The application of ozonated oil preparations is very promising in a variety of skin and mucosal infections. Moreover, ozonated oils are far less expensive than antibiotic preparations.
Subject(s)
Anti-Infective Agents , Dermatomycoses/prevention & control , Oxidants, Photochemical/chemistry , Ozone/chemistry , Sesame Oil , Skin Diseases, Bacterial/prevention & control , Administration, Topical , Anti-Infective Agents/chemistry , Anti-Infective Agents/pharmacology , Bacteria/growth & development , Candida albicans/growth & development , Dermatomycoses/microbiology , Humans , Sesame Oil/chemistry , Sesame Oil/pharmacology , Skin Diseases, Bacterial/microbiologyABSTRACT
AIMS: Evaluation of bactericidal effect of different concentrations of ozone when used (a) as a gas, or (b) dissolved in saline. The addition of hydrogen peroxide or 4-hydroxynonenal dissolved in saline was also tested, as well as the effect of human plasma. METHODS AND RESULTS: Staphylococcus aureus, methicillin-resistant Staph. aureus (MRSA), and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, suspended in their culture media were tested. While all bacteria suspended in protein-free saline were killed at high ozone concentrations, they survived when as little as 5% human plasma was present. Hydrogen peroxide was 100-fold less active than ozone and needed to remain in contact with bacteria for at least 60 min. 4-hydroxynonenal (2 micromol l(-1)) was inhibitory for proliferation of both Staph. aureus and MRSA, but not for Ps. aeruginosa. CONCLUSIONS: Ozone and the cascade of its derivative products are potent bactericidal agents, but even small amounts of human plasma, hence of hydro- and liposoluble antioxidants, in bacterial suspensions inhibit oxidation and protect bacteria. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: Any substantial in vivo cytocidal effect of ozone and its derivatives can be excluded. On the other hand, topical and continuous action of various ozone preparations remains valuable in a variety of skin and mucosal infections.
