Przydatnosc preparatow barwionych metoda Grama do oceny stopnia czystosci pochwy u ciezarnych

• Autorzy: Wasiela M. , Krzeminski Z. , Hanke W. , Kalinka J.

Warianty tytułu

EN

The diagnostic value of Gram stained method for evaluation of vaginal smears during pregnancy

• Języki publikacji: PL

Abstrakty

PL

Porównano diagnostyczną wartość rozmazów pochwowych barwionych metodą Giemsy (tzw. mikrobiologiczne stopnie czystości pochwy) z metodą Grama do określenia charakteru wydzieliny pochwowej u kobiet ciężarnych. U 29,3% ciężarnych z rozmazem uznawanym jako prawidłowy, stwierdzono bakteryjną waginozę, a u 75,9% florę patogenną w stężeniach wyższych niż graniczne (tj. >105). Przy rozmazie określonym jako nieprawidłowy, florę prawidłową metodą Grama zdiagnozowano u 31,7%, w hodowli zaś u 17,1% z tej grupy badanych nie stwierdzono żadnych patogenów. Stosowana rutynowo 6-stopniowa skala do oceny charakteru wydzieliny pochwowej powinna być zastąpiona metodą Grama.

EN

The main aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic value of Giemsa stained method with Gram stained method for the evaluation of vaginal smears among pregnant women. A study population comprised 111 pregnant between 6 and 30 weeks of gestation. The vaginal smears from every subject was diagnosed according to Giemsa and Gram stained method and micro-organisms were isolated by culture. In 29,3% cases diagnosed as normal flora (2a) on the basis of Giemsa method bacterial vaginosis was detected in Gram stains according to Spiegel's criteria and pathological microflora in concentration ≥105 CFU/ml was cultured among 75,9% of them. Among 31,7% women who had grade 3a (abnormal) in Giemsa stains method normal flora was diagnosed on the basis on Gram's method and from 17,1% pregnant women from this group we did not isolated any pathogens. For evaluation of vaginal smears during pregnancy the Giemsa method should be replaced by Gram stained method.

Słowa kluczowe

PL

waginoza; patogeny; pochwa; bakterie beztlenowe; kobiety ciezarne; drogi rodne; metoda Giemsy; czystosc; liczebnosc; rozmazy cytologiczne; narzady rozrodcze; choroby czlowieka; kobiety; barwienie; metoda Grama

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Medycyna Doświadczalna i Mikrobiologia
• Rocznik: 2004
• Tom: 56
• Numer: 1
• Opis fizyczny: s.93-98,tab.,bibliogr.

Twórcy

autor

Wasiela M.

• Zaklad Mikrobiologii Lekarskiej, ul.Pomorska 251, 92-215 Lodz

autor

Krzeminski Z.

autor

Hanke W.

autor

Kalinka J.

Bibliografia

• 1. Amsel R, Totten PA, Spiegel CA Non-specific vaginitis: diagnostic criteria and microbial and epidemiological associations. Am J Med 1983; 74: 14-22.
• 2. Armer TI, Duff P. Intraamniotic infection in patients with intact membranes and preterm labour. Obstet Gynecol Surv 1991; 46: 589-93.
• 3. Colli E, Bertulessi C, Landoni M. Bacterial vaginosis in pregnancy and preterm birth: evidence from the literature. J Inter Med Res 1996; 24: 317-24.
• 4. Cristiano L, Rampello S, Noris C. Bacterial vaginosis: prevalence in an Italian population of asymptomatic pregnant women and diagnostic aspects. Eur J Epidemiol 1996; 12: 383-90.
• 5. Egger M, Muhlemann K, Aebi C. Infections in pregnancy. Ther Umsch 1999; 56: 577-82.
• 6. Eschenbach DA, Hillier S, Critcholow C. Diagnosis and clinical manifestation of bacterial vaginosis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1988; 158: 819-28.
• 7. Eschenbach DA, Davick PR, Williams SJ. Prevalence of hydrogen peroxide-producing Lactobacillus species in normal women and women with BV J Clin Microbiol 1989; 27: 251-6.
• 8. Gardo S. Bacterial vaginosis. Orv Hetil 1998; 139: 1403-8.
• 9. Gratacos E, Figueras F, Barranco M. Prevalence of bacterial vaginosis and correlation of clinical to Gram stain diagnostic criteria in low risk pregnant women. Eur J Epidemiol 1999; 15: 913-6.
• 10. Gravet MG, Hummel D, Eschenbach DA, Holmes KK. Preterm labour associated with subclinical amniotic fluid infection and with bacterial vaginosis. Obstet Gynecol 1986; 67: 229-37.
• 11. Hawes SE, Hillier SL, Benedetti J. Hydrogen peroxide-producing lactobacilli and acquisition of vaginal infections. J Infect Dis 1996; 174: 1058-63.
• 12. Hay PE, Taylor-Robinson D, Lamont RF. Diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis in a gynaecology clinic. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1992; 99: 63-6.
• 13. Hay PE, Morgan DJ, Ison CA. A longitudinal study of bacterial vaginosis during pregnancy. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1994; 101: 1048-53.
• 14. Hillier SL, Nugent RP, Eschenbach DA. Vaginal Infections and Prematurity Study Group: Association between bacterial vaginosis and preterm delivery of a low-birth-weight infant. N Engl J Med 1995; 333:1737-42.
• 15. Hillier SL, Krohn MA, Rabe LK. The normal vaginal flora, H202-producing lactobacilli and bacterial vaginosis in pregnant women. Clin Infect Dis 1993; 16 (Suppl 4): S273: 81.
• 16. Krohn MA, Hillier SL, Eschenbach DA. : Comparison of methods for diagnosing bacterial vaginosis among pregnant women. J Clini Microbiol 1989; 27: 1266-71.
• 17. Martius J, Roos T. The role of urogenital tract infections in the aetiology of preterm birth: a review. Arch Gynecol Obstet 1996; 258: 1-19.
• 18. McGregor JA, French JI. Bacterial vaginosis in pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2000; 55 (Suppl 1): 1-19.
• 19. Mead PB. Epidemiology of bacterial vaginosis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1993; 169: 446-49.
• 20. Mikamo H, Sato Y, Hayasaki Y. Bacterial isolates from patients with preterm labour with an without preterm rupture of fetal membranes. Infect Dis Obstet Gynecol 1999; 7: 190-4.
• 21. Morris MC, Rogers PA, Kinghorn GR. Is bacterial vaginosis a sexually transmitted infection? Sex Transm Inf 2001; 77: 63-8.
• 22. Newton ER, Piper J, Peairs W. Bacterial Vaginosis and intraamniotic infection. AM J Obstet Gynecol 1997; 176: 672-7.
• 23. Nugent RP, Krohn ma, Hillier SL. Reliability of diagnosing bacterial vaginosis is improved by a standardised method of Gram stain interpretation. J Clin Microbiol 1991; 29: 297-301.
• 24. Oleen-Burkey MA, Hillier SL. Pregnancy complications associated with bacterial vaginosis and their estimated costs. Infect Dis Obstet Gynecol 1995; 3: 149-57.
• 25. Sherman DJ, Tovbin J, Lazarovich T. Chorioamnionitis caused by gram-negative bacteria as an etiologie factor in preterm delivery. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1997; 16: 417-23.
• 26. Spiegel CA, Amsel R, Holmes KK. Diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis by direct Gram stain of vaginal fluid. J Clin Microbiol 1983, 18,170-7.
• 27. Spiegel CA. Bacterial vaginosis. Clin Microbiol Rev 1991; 4: 485-502.
• 28. Tam MT, Yungblum M, Myles T. Gram stain method shows better sensitivity than clinical criteria for detection of bacterial vaginosis in surveillance of pregnant, low-income women in a clinical setting. Infect Dis Obstet Gynecol 1998; 6: 204-8.
• 29. Wasiela M, Zdziennicki A, Kuzmecka-Matuszewska J. Jakościowe i ilościowe zmiany w biocenozie kanału szyjki macicy u kobiet w III trymestrze ciąży spowodowane redukcją Lactobacillus spp. Gin. Pol 1997; 68: 261.
• 30. Winefield AD, Murphy SA. Bacterial vaginosis: a review. Clin Excell Nurse Pract 1998; 2: 212-7.