Mixture of periodontopathogenic bacteria influences interaction with KB cells

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to investigate the adhesion and invasion of periodontopathogenic bacteria in varied mixed infections and the release of interleukins from an epithelial cell line (KB cells). METHODS: KB cells were co-cultured with Porphyromonas gingivalis ATCC 33277 and M5-1-2, Tannerella forsythia ATCC 43037, Treponema denticola ATCC 35405 and Fusobacterium nucleatum ATCC 25586 in single and mixed infections. The numbers of adherent and internalized bacteria were determined up to 18 h after bacterial exposure. Additionally, the mRNA expression and concentrations of released interleukin (IL)-6 and IL-8 were measured. RESULTS: All periodontopathogenic bacteria adhered and internalized in different numbers to KB cells, but individually without any evidence of co-aggregation also to F. nucleatum. High levels of epithelial mRNA of IL-6 and IL-8 were detectable after all bacterial challenges. After the mixed infection of P. gingivalis ATCC 33277 and F. nucleatum ATCC 25586 the highest levels of released interleukins were found. No IL-6 and IL-8 were detectable after the mixed infection of P. gingivalis M5-1-2 and F. nucleatum ATCC 25586 and the fourfold infection of P. gingivalis ATCC 33277, T. denticola ATCC 35405, T. forsythia ATCC 43037 and F. nucleatum ATCC 25586. CONCLUSION: Anaerobic periodontopathogenic bacteria promote the release of IL-6 and IL-8 by epithelial cells. Despite a continuous epithelial expression of IL-8 mRNA by all bacterial infections these effects are temporary because of the time-dependent degradation of cytokines by bacterial proteases. Mixed infections have a stronger virulence potential than single bacteria. Further research is necessary to evaluate the role of mixed infections and biofilms in the pathogenesis of periodontitis.

Conjunctival Proliferation After a Mild Pepper Spray Injury in a Young Child

PURPOSE To report a case of conjunctival proliferation in a 2.5-year-old boy after initial evidence of a mild chemical injury after ocular exposure to pepper spray (oleoresin capsicum). METHODS Case report with ophthalmologic and histologic findings. RESULTS A child presented with mild conjunctival injection and chemosis without any corneal erosion after direct exposure to pepper spray. Three weeks later, a significant conjunctival proliferation was found at the limbus, which was refractory to treatment with topical corticosteroids. Finally, proliferative tissue was surgically excised without clinical recurrence during 2 months of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS We hypothesize that the young age of the patient may have been an important factor for the severe conjunctival proliferation in comparison to a mainly uncomplicated course of pepper spray injuries in most adults. We recommend the use of topical antiinflammatory treatment even in apparently mild pepper spray injuries, especially in young children.

Influence of epidural mixture and surgery on bladder function after open renal surgery: a randomized clinical trial

In a previous observational study, thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) after open renal surgery resulted in clinically relevant postvoid residuals (PVRs). This study aimed to investigate the individual contribution of epidurally administrated drugs and surgery in bladder dysfunction.

Amphotericin B nasal spray has no effect on nasal polyps

Nasal polyps and chronic rhinosinusitis are the products of an inflammatory process. Recently, fungal involvement has been thought to stimulate the development of polyps, and administration of antifungal agents was therefore considered a potential treatment. Several studies have been published indicating amphotericin B as an effective treatment for nasal polyps and chronic rhinosinusitis. The aim of our investigation was to evaluate the efficacy of intranasal applied amphotericin B on the growth of nasal polyps in a three-month, prospective, open trial. Our results show that nasal amphotericin B spray is not effective for nasal polyps and may even cause deterioration.

Acute respiratory syndrome after inhalation of waterproofing sprays: a posteriori exposure-response assessment in 102 cases

Waterproofing agents are widely used to protect leather and textiles in both domestic and occupational activities. An outbreak of acute respiratory syndrome following exposure to waterproofing sprays occurred during the winter 2002-2003 in Switzerland. About 180 cases were reported by the Swiss Toxicological Information Centre between October 2002 and March 2003, whereas fewer than 10 cases per year had been recorded previously. The reported cases involved three brands of sprays containing a common waterproofing mixture, that had undergone a formulation change in the months preceding the outbreak. A retrospective analysis was undertaken in collaboration with the Swiss Toxicological Information Centre and the Swiss Registries for Interstitial and Orphan Lung Diseases to clarify the circumstances and possible causes of the observed health effects. Individual exposure data were generated with questionnaires and experimental emission measurements. The collected data was used to conduct numeric simulation for 102 cases of exposure. A classical two-zone model was used to assess the aerosol dispersion in the near- and far-field during spraying. The resulting assessed dose and exposure levels obtained were spread on large scales, of several orders of magnitude. No dose-response relationship was found between exposure indicators and health effects indicators (perceived severity and clinical indicators). Weak relationships were found between unspecific inflammatory response indicators (leukocytes, C-reactive protein) and the maximal exposure concentration. The results obtained disclose a high interindividual response variability and suggest that some indirect mechanism(s) predominates in the respiratory disease occurrence. Furthermore, no threshold could be found to define a safe level of exposure. These findings suggest that the improvement of environmental exposure conditions during spraying alone does not constitute a sufficient measure to prevent future outbreaks of waterproofing spray toxicity. More efficient preventive measures are needed prior to the marketing and distribution of new waterproofing agents.