A comparative study on two methods of ocular surface microbial sampling

被引:1
|
作者
Shen, Xinyi [1 ]
Xu, Yi [1 ]
Huang, Jinzhi [1 ]
Wu, Peiyu [1 ]
Zhou, Weihe [1 ]
Chen, Yanyan [1 ]
机构
[1] Wenzhou Med Univ, Eye Hosp, Natl Clin Res Ctr Ocular Dis, Wenzhou 325027, Peoples R China
关键词
Cornea; Infection surveillance and control; Microbial aerosol; Sampling method; COVID-19; Ocular surface microbial infection; Conjunctival sac;
D O I
10.1186/s12886-023-02979-1
中图分类号
R77 [眼科学];
学科分类号
100212 ;
摘要
PurposeTo compare the effect of traditional conjunctival sac swab sampling (A) with aerosolization ocular surface microorganism sampling (B),a novel microbial sampling method, in detecting ocular microbial infection.MethodsThe study included 61 participants (122 eyes) enrolled at the Eye Hospital, Wenzhou Medical University from December, 2021 to March, 2023. Each eye of the participants underwent sampling first with method A then B.Before aerosolization sampling, the air environment was disinfected and sampled as blank air control sample. Subsequently, the air pulses impinging the ocular surface causes dehiscence of the tear film covering the ocular surface and aerosols are formed.The microorganisms from the ocular surface attach to the aerosols generated as aerosolization ocular surface microorganism and be sampled as subject sample by bio-aerosol sampler.The samples were collected and incubated at 25celcius for 3-5 days and 37celcius for 24-48 h.The colonies were counted and identified by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry.ResultsThe accuracy in Group B was higher than that in Group A (45.8% vs. 38.3%, P = 0.289). There was a slight level of agreement between the results from both the sampling methods (k = 0.031, P = 0.730). The sensitivity in Group B was higher than that in Group A (57.1% vs. 35.7%, P = 0.453). The specificity results in Group B was higher than that in Group A (44.3% vs. 38.7%, P = 0.480). There were 12 and 37 types of microbes detected in Groups A and B, respectively.ConclusionsCompared with traditional swab sampling, the novel aerosolization sampling method shows higher accuracy and more comprehensive detection of microbes; however, it cannot completely replace swab sampling. The novel method can be a novel conducive strategy and supplement swab sampling to auxiliary diagnose ocular surface infection.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Comparative study of interpolation methods for low-density sampling
    Karp, F. H. S.
    Adamchuk, V.
    Dutilleul, P.
    Melnitchouck, A.
    PRECISION AGRICULTURE, 2024, 25 (06) : 2776 - 2800
  • [22] Modern Bayesian Sampling Methods for Cosmological Inference: A Comparative Study
    Staicova, Denitsa
    UNIVERSE, 2025, 11 (02)
  • [23] SAMPLING METHODS FOR AMPHIPODS OF POSIDONIA OCEANICA MEADOWS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY
    Michel, Loic
    Lepoint, Gilles
    Dauby, Patrick
    Sturaro, Nicolas
    CRUSTACEANA, 2010, 83 (01) : 39 - 47
  • [25] Methods for surface particle removal: A comparative study
    Bardina, Juan
    Particulate Science and Technology, 1988, 6 (02) : 121 - 131
  • [26] Can the sampling method affect the detection of incidental gallbladder carcinoma? Comparative analysis of two sampling methods
    Hacihasanoglu, Ezgi
    Pasaoglu, Esra
    Cin, Merve
    Yarikkaya, Enver
    Dursun, Nevra
    Koca, Sevim Baykal
    ANNALS OF DIAGNOSTIC PATHOLOGY, 2023, 67
  • [27] Comparative study of two cytofluorometric methods of analysis
    Wouters, C
    Bossuyt, X
    Ceuppens, J
    Stevens, EAM
    JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGICAL METHODS, 2000, 234 (1-2) : 89 - 98
  • [28] Aeroallergens: a comparative study of two monitoring methods
    M. P. Plaza
    P. Alcázar
    M. J. Velasco-Jiménez
    C. Galán
    Aerobiologia, 2017, 33 : 363 - 373
  • [29] Aeroallergens: a comparative study of two monitoring methods
    Plaza, M. P.
    Alcazar, P.
    Velasco-Jimenez, M. J.
    Galan, C.
    AEROBIOLOGIA, 2017, 33 (03) : 363 - 373
  • [30] Aeroallergens: a comparative study of two monitoring methods
    Galan, C.
    Plaza, M.
    Alcazar, P.
    Velasco-Jimenez, M.
    ALLERGY, 2017, 72 : 173 - 173