4.4 Article

Prevalence and antifungal resistance profile of Candida spp. oral isolates from patients with type 1 and 2 diabetes mellitus

Journal

ARCHIVES OF ORAL BIOLOGY
Volume 56, Issue 6, Pages 549-555

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.archoralbio.2010.11.018

Keywords

Candida spp.; Oral isolates; Diabetes mellitus; Antifungal drug

Funding

  1. FAPESP [04/01602-5]
  2. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: The goal of the study was to measure the prevalence of Candida spp. in the oral cavity of patients with diabetes types 1 and 2 when compared to healthy individuals and to study antifungal resistance profile of the isolates. Design: There were 162 subjects in the study: diabetes type 1 (n = 39); control group 1 (n = 50): healthy individuals matched in gender, age, and oral conditions to diabetes type 1 patients; diabetes type 2 (n = 37); control group 2 (n = 36) who were matched to each patient of the diabetes type 2 group. Stimulated saliva was collected and isolates were identified with phenotypic tests. The presence of C. dubliniensis was determined by multiplex PCR. Results: There were no statistically significant differences in Candida spp. frequency between the diabetes 1 group and its control (p = 0.443) nor between the diabetes 2 group and its control (p = 0.429). C. albicans was the most frequently isolated yeast in all groups. In the diabetes groups, C. stellatoidea, C. parapsilosis, C. tropicalis, C. lipolytica, C. glabrata, and C. krusei were also identified. Additionally, in control groups, C. kefyr was also detected. None of the isolates were resistant to amphotericin B and flucytosine. A low percentage of the isolates were resistant to ketoconazole. Conclusions: No differences were detected in colonization of Candida spp. oral isolates from type 1 and type 2 diabetes when compared to matched controls. The antifungal resistance of Candida spp. isolates for ketoconazole from type 1 diabetes patients was significantly higher than that of its matched control. (C) 2010 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available