Journals / MANTAR DERGİSİ / 2019 / Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 3

Dermatophytes in Patients Attending to Selcuk University Hospital in Konya

Konya Selçuk Üniversitesi Hastanesi’ne Başvuran Hastalarda Saptanan Dermatofitler

Pages
84–88
Publication Date
2019-12-26
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In line with these data, it is considered that clinical microscopic examination and culture method should be performed in addition to clinical evaluation for the diagnosis of dermatophytosis.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Dermatophyte infection constitutes a significant proportion of patients admitted to dermatology clinics.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this study, samples taken from patients suspected of dermotophytosis between 01.06.2010 and 01.06.2019 were examined and the frequency of isolated dermatophytes was determined and it was aimed to evaluate the agreement between clinical diagnosis and laboratory diagnosis.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In line with these data, it is considered that clinical microscopic examination and culture method should be performed in addition to clinical evaluation for the diagnosis of dermatophytosis.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2010 · 4993 samples
⚙️Variables:Dermatofit · Dermatofitozis · Epidermophyton

Abstract

Dermatophyte infection constitutes a significant proportion of patients admitted to dermatology clinics. Dermotophytosis mimics the clinical picture of many diseases. Detection of dermatophytosis agents is important for prevention and treatment as well as for epidemiological studies. In this study, samples taken from patients suspected of dermotophytosis between 01.06.2010 and 01.06.2019 were examined and the frequency of isolated dermatophytes was determined and it was aimed to evaluate the agreement between clinical diagnosis and laboratory diagnosis. Hair, skin and nail samples taken from patients suspected of dermatophytosis were examined. Preparations with 10 % KOH were prepared for direct microscopic examination. Sabouraud Dextrose Agara double plate cultivation was performed for the samples that were cultured. Under direct microscopic examination 1800 (36 %) of the 4993 samples were found to be positive. When the results of the cultures were examined; Trichophyton rubrum (Castell.) Sabour. (78 %) was the most commonly isolated dermatophyte agent and Trichophyton rubrum was followed by T. tonsurans (7.6 %), T. mentagrophytes (3.8 %), T. verrucosum (3.8 %), Microsporum canis (3 %) and M. gypseum ( E.Bodin) Guiart&Grigoraki (2.3 %) respectively. According to our results, the concordance between direct microscopy results and clinical diagnosis were 50.3 %; however, there was a 63.6 % concordance between culture results and clinical diagnosis. In line with these data, it is considered that clinical microscopic examination and culture method should be performed in addition to clinical evaluation for the diagnosis of dermatophytosis.

Özet

Dermatoloji kliniklerine başvuranların önemli bir kısmını dermatofit enfeksiyonu olan hastalar oluşturmaktadır. Dermotofitozlar pekçok hastalığın klinik tablosunu taklit etmektedir. Dermatofitoz etkenlerinin saptanması, korunma ve tedavide yol gösterici olduğu gibi epidemiyolojik çalışmalar için de önemlidir. Bu çalışmada, 01.06.2010 ve 01.06.2019 tarihleri arasında dermotofitoz şüpheli hastalardan alınan örnekler incelenerek, izole edilen dermatofitlerin sıklığı belirlenmiştir ve ayrıca klinik tanı ile laboratuvar tanısı arasındaki uyumun değerlendirilmesi amaçlanmıştır. Dermatofitoz şüpheli hastalardan alınan kıl, deri ve tırnak örnekleri incelenmiştir. Direkt mikroskobik inceleme amacıyla % 10 KOH ile hazırlanan preparatlar hazırlanmıştır. Kültür istemi olan örneklerin ise Sabouraud Dekstroz Agara çift plak ekimleri yapılmıştır. Direkt mikroskobik inceleme yapılan 4993 örnekten 1800’ü (% 36) pozitif olarak bulunmuştur. Kültür sonuçları incelendiğinde; Trichophyton rubrum (Castell.) Sabour. (% 78) en sık izole edilen dermatofit etkeni olup bunu sırasıyla T. tonsurans (% 7.6), T. mentagrophytes (% 3.8), T. verrucosum (% 3.8), Microsporum canis (% 3) ve M. gypseum ( E.Bodin) Guiart&Grigoraki (% 2.3) izlemiştir. Çalışmamızın sonuçlarına göre; direkt mikroskopi sonuçlarıyla klinik tanı arasında % 50.3; kültür sonuçlarıyla klinik tanı arasında ise % 63.6 oranında bir uyum tespit edilmiştir. Bu veriler doğrultusunda, dermatofitoz tanısı için klinik değerlendirmenin yanı sıra, direkt mikroskopik inceleme ve kültür yönteminin yapılmasının yararlı olacağı düşünülmüştür.

🔖

Cite This Article

ERYILMAZ, E., SAMADZADE, R., MAÇİN, S., FINDIK, D. (2019). Dermatophytes in Patients Attending to Selcuk University Hospital in Konya. MANTAR DERGİSİ, Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 3, 84–88. https://ajindex.com/articles/687673

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Agarwal, U.S., Saran J., and Agarwal, l. P. (2014). Clinico-Mycological Study of Dermatophytes in a Tertiary Care Centre in Northwest India. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol.,80 (2) 194. Bilgili, M. E., Sabuncu, İ., Saraçoğlu, Z. N., Ürer, S. M., Kiraz, N., ve Akgün, Y. (2001). Kliniğimize Başvuran Dermatofitozlu Olgulardan İzole Edilen Dermatofit Türleri.Turkiye.Klinikleri.J.Dermatol.,11 (4) 185-190.
  2. Bindu, V., and Pavithran, K.(2002). Clinico-Mycological Study of Dermatophytosis in Calicut. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol., 68 (5) 259–261.
  3. Coulibaly, O., Lollivier, C., Piarroux, R., and Ranque, S.(2018). Epidemiology of Human Dermatophytoses in Africa. Med.Myco., 56 (2) 145-161.
  4. Ebrahimi, M., Zarrinfar, H., Naseri, A., Najafzadeh, M.C.,Fata, A., Parian, M., Khorsand, I., and Babic, M.N. (2019). Epidemiology of Dermatophytosis in Northeastern Iran; A Subtropical Region. Curr.Med. Mycol., 5 (2) 16-21. Ergin,Ç., Ergin,F., Yaylı, G., and Baysal,V. (2000). Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dermatoloji Kliniğine Başvuran Hastalarda Dermatofitoz Etkenleri. Türk.Mikrobiyol.Cem.Dergisi.,30 (3-4) 121-124. Ergin,Ç., Ergin,Ş., Kaleli, İ., Şanlı, E. B., Cevahir, N., and Kaçar, N. (2004). Pamukkale Üniversitesi Hastanesi Dermatoloji Polikliniği’ne Başvuran Hastalarda Dermatofitoz Etkenleri. İnf. Derg.,18 339-342.
  5. Gül, Ü. (2014). Derinin Yüzeyel Dermotofit Enfeksiyonları, Ankara.Med.J.,14 (3) 107-113.
  6. Ilkit, M.(2010). Favus of the Scalp: an Overview and Update. Mycopahologia.,170 (3) 143-154.
  7. Jain, N., Sharma, M., and Saxena, V.N. (2008). Mlinico-mycological Profile of Dermatophytosis in Jaipur, Rajasthan. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol., 74 (3) 274–275.
  8. Jha, B., Bhattarai, S., Sapkota, J., Sharma,M., and Bhatt,C.P. (2019).
  9. Dermatophytes in Skin, Nail and Hair among the Patients Attending Out Patient Department., J.Nepal.Health.Res.Counc.,16 (41) 434-437. Kechia,F.A.,Kouoto, E. A, Nkoa T., et al.(2016). Epidemiology of Tinea Capitis Among School-Age Children in Meiganga, Cameroon. J Mycol Medicale.,24 (2) 129–134. LANGE, 2018.
  10. Tıbbi Mikrobiyoloji ve İmmunoloji, Ondördüncü baskı, Güneş Tıp Kitabevleri, s:404 Moriarty, B., Hay, R., and Morris-Jones, R.(2012). The Diagnosis and Management of Tinea. BMJ.,344 1–10.
  11. Nweze, E., and Eke, I.(2017). Dermatophytes and Dermatophytosis in the Eastern and Southern Parts of Africa. Med Mycol., 56 (1) 13–28.
  12. Özekinci, T., Özbek, E., Gedik,M., Topçu, M., Tekay, F., ve Mete,M. (2006). Dicle Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi