Isolation, Characterization, and Antifungal Sensitivity Pattern of Candida Species Causing Otomycosis
Abstract
Otomycosis is one of the overwhelming diseases both for patients and specialists with a high recurrence rate despite adequate and proper treatment. This study aims to investigate further the various types of fungi involved in otomycosis and test their susceptibility against common antifungals. In total, among candidiasis-suspected patients, 60 samples were incorporated into the study. PCR method was used for Candida species detection. Broth microdilution method of Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute document M60 was applied to assess MIC values of rampant antifungals. We used SPSS software (version 16.0) for statistical analysis. In this survey, 20, 3, and 1 type of Candida albicans, Candida parapsilosis, and Candida glabrata were identified, respectively. All 20 C. albicans isolates were sensitive to amphotericin B (range 0.03-1 μg/ml), voriconazole, (0.03-1 μg/ml), and itraconazole (0.03-0.5 μg/ml.); moreover, one isolate was resistant to fluconazole. Two isolates out of three isolates of C. parapsilosis, were susceptible to all agents while the other one isolate was resistant to fluconazole. C. glabrata isolate was susceptible to all agents. In summary, the results conveyed the importance of clinicians remaining vigilant in diagnosing otomycosis due to its non-specific manifestations. To manage effectively otomycosis and avoid complications or recurrence, it is imperative to diagnose the condition at the earliest time, confirm its virulence through various tests, and identify antifungal susceptibility patterns. Despite this, relapse is often seen and achieving complete remission can prove to be a major hurdle in individuals who have had mastoidectomy and those with weakened immune systems.
2. Faris C. Scott-Brown’s Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, 7th ed. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2011;93:559.
3. Agarwal P, Devi LS. Otomycosis in a rural community attending a tertiary care hospital: assessment of risk factors and identification of fungal and bacterial agents. J Clin Diagn Res 2017;11:DC14-8.
4. Dawson M. Topley and Wilson's Microbiology and Microbial Infections: Immunology. British J Biomed Sci 2007;64:190.
5. Flood L. Logan turner's diseases of the nose, throat and ear: head and neck surgery. J Laryngol Otolog 2016;130:415-6.
6. Dhingra P, Dhingra S. Diseases of Ear, Nose and Throat-eBook: Elsevier India; 2017.
7. Rodrigues C, Ohri V, Raghunath D. Antifungal Susceptibility testing in Otomycoses. Indian J Med Microbiol 1988;6:337-42.
8. Viswanatha B, Sumatha D, Vijayashree MS. Otomycosis in immunocompetent and immunocompromised patients: comparative study and literature review. Ear Nose Throat J 2012;91:114-21.
9. Barati B, Okhovvat S, Goljanian A, Omrani M. Otomycosis in central Iran: a clinical and mycological study. Iran Red Crescent Med J 2011;13:873-6.
10. Aneja K, Sharma C, Joshi R. Fungal infection of the ear: a common problem in the north eastern part of Haryana. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2010;74:604-7.
11. Pontes ZB, Silva AD, Lima Ede O, Guerra Mde H, Oliveira NM, Carvalho Mde F, et al. Otomycosis: a retrospective study. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2009;75:367-70.
12. Karn K, Lakshmanan A, Hemamalini M, Radha M. Otomycosis: A study from a tertiary care center. J Pharm Res 2014;8:266-8.
13. Shokoohi G, Rouhi R, Etehadnezhad M, Ahmadi B, Javidnia J, Nouripour-Sisakht S, et al. In Vitro Antifungal Activity of Luliconazole, Efinaconazole, and Nine Comparators Against Aspergillus and Candida Strains Isolated from Otomycosis. Jundishapur J Microbiol 2021;14:e115902.
Files | ||
Issue | Vol 61 No 8 (2023) | |
Section | Original Article(s) | |
DOI | https://doi.org/10.18502/acta.v61i8.14902 | |
Keywords | ||
Otomycosis Antifungal susceptibility |
Rights and permissions | |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |