June 2015
Volume 56, Issue 7
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2015
Comparison of two different evaluation methods for biofilm formation of S.epidermidis isolated from ocular surface.
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Berna Akova Budak
    Uludag University, Bursa, Turkey
  • Sertac Argun Kivanc
    Uludag University, Bursa, Turkey
  • Meral Yildiz
    Uludag University, Bursa, Turkey
  • Merih Kivanc
    Anadolu University, Eskişehir, Turkey
  • Gulay Gullulu
    Armedica Eye Center, Izmit, Turkey
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships Berna Akova Budak, None; Sertac Argun Kivanc, None; Meral Yildiz, None; Merih Kivanc, None; Gulay Gullulu, None
  • Footnotes
    Support None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2015, Vol.56, 4076. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Berna Akova Budak, Sertac Argun Kivanc, Meral Yildiz, Merih Kivanc, Gulay Gullulu; Comparison of two different evaluation methods for biofilm formation of S.epidermidis isolated from ocular surface.. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2015;56(7 ):4076.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose: To compare of two different evaluation methods for biofilm formation of Staphylococcus epidermidis isolated from ocular surface.

Methods: S.epidermidis strains that were isolated from ocular surface previously were studied. Microtiter plate method (MPA) and Congo red agar (CRA) method were used for measuring biofilm formation. Ica A, ica D, bap genes positivity and multi-antibiotic resistance were determined. Accurracy of measuring biofilm production capacity of MPA and CRA were compared.

Results: 8 of the strains produced strong biofilm according to MPA method, and 4 of these strains also produced strong biofilm according to CRA method. 8 strains produced strong biofilm according to CRA method. 11 strains were biofilm negative with MPA however 7 (64 %) of these were positive with CRA. 15 strains were resistant to 3 or more antibiotics, 7 (46%) and 6 (40 %) of these strains produced strong biofilm according to MPA and CRA methods respectively. 8 strains were resistant to 4 or more antibiotics, 6 (75 %) and 3 (37 %) of these strains produced strong biofilm according to MPA and CRA methods respectively.

Conclusions: Strains that produced strong biofilm with MPA had more multi-antibiotic resistance than with CRA.These two methods may not be consistent with each other.

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×